Since the previous podcast in September, we have seen ISIS rise up from relative obscurity to a headline phenomenon requiring the attention of leaders around the world. In this podcast we provide you with a summary of a few headline cases here in Australia to fill you in. We continue with the reading of the Tyranny of God. In Chapter 20, we look at a World Without God.

Hello, this is Marquez from Reasonism.Org and welcome to Reasonism Radio. Reasonism Radio is a podcast for free-thinkers, non-believers, Reasonists, atheists and religious believers alike. You can listen to our podcasts by subscribing on iTunes or your favourite podcast software or by visiting our website at Reasonism.Org.

Since the previous podcast in September, we have seen ISIS rise up from relative obscurity to a headline phenomenon requiring the attention of leaders around the world.

Judging from the server logs and website stats, many listeners of this podcast are from around the world. Half of you are from the USA. The rest come from India, Brazil, Canada, the UK, Philippines, New Zealand and Germany. I would like to give a summary of events here in Australia to fill you in.

I am aware of at a few cases where Australian Jihadists went overseas to fight for ISIS. The first was Mohammad Ali Baryalei (Source), a former bouncer and part-time actor. There was also and an Australian teenager who went to Baghdad and bombed a busy market place, killing at least five people. They're not alone. It seems that there are many Jihadists are going overseas to fight for ISIS.

I find this all so ironic. Migrants from other countries come to Australia, Australia – its government and its people -- accepts them… grants them Residency and Citizenship rights, and yet they, or their children, go overseas to fight against the Australian Government, against the Australian people. The same can be said for the situation in the UK and the US.

In September 23, shortly after a video of speech made by ISIS encouraged Muslims to kill infidels, shed their blood and take their money, there was the case of an 18 year old 'radicalised' boy who pulled a knife and stabbed a police officer who later shot the boy (Source).

There was also Rasoul Al Mousawi who was shot dead outside a Shia Muslim Prayer Hall by a man believed to be from a Sunni extremist group in Sydney who wants to establish an Islamic caliphate in the Middle East (Source).

As a result of what some Australians see and read on the news, they decided it was a good idea to call, Muslim Australians they see in shopping centres as 'terrorists' and tell them to 'go back to their own country'. (Source)

This is a mistake. The best allies we have against Extremist Muslims are moderate or non-practicing Muslims. It is they who have the influence and the power to have conversations with young men who are being indoctrinated and radicalised by extremist groups. Many Muslims want the same thing we want. They want peace. They want their children to group and contribute to society.

Therefore, instead of alienating them, we need to create stronger bonds with Muslims who also want peace.

Knowing that this is happening in your community, in your country, often times makes you feel helpless. And just recently, I thought, "why even bother"? Why even continue with these podcasts? Why even continue with this blog?

But we cannot give up. Even if these podcasts or blog posts eventually only reaches one person out there but if that person stops and questions their beliefs at some stage, then it is resistance: Resistance to the insanity that is affecting too many lives.

So let's press on. In the previous podcasts, we went through the 19th chapter of my book the Tyranny of God where I argued that we can believe in anything we want but, we have an obligation to justify our beliefs to other people because it affects their lives and well-being.

In our discussion of ISIS, a big part of their training process is to inculcate their recruits with their religious ideology (Source). These religious ideologies are possible only because they have been allowed to persist for so long, privileged, remaining relatively unchallenged by the rest of society.

Consider for example that ISIS has a poem it hands out to its recruits. This poem promises their recruits that if they fight for ISIS, they will spend the rest of eternity with 72 virgins having round and firm chests (Source). Look I am in no way suggesting that the motivation of most ISIS fighters is for this promise but I am just citing it as an example of a religious idea that we, as a society, because most of us are too afraid to offend religious sensitivities, we have insufficiently challenged the truthfulness of claims like these over generations and have allowed it to persist. Now, 2014, we have to be in a war against an army of young men inculcated with religious ideas such as this.

People do have an obligation to justify and argue for their religious convictions with the rest of us because religious beliefs can lead to disastrous consequences now or in the future.

In this and future podcasts, we explore and envision what the world without religion and superstition… without beliefs in a god or gods.

This Sunday, 7th of December 2014, Chapter 20 of the Tyranny of God, A World Without God.

In the previous podcast, we broadcasted the first part of Chapter 15 of the Tyranny of God where I began going through the process in which religions, more specifically, Christianity and Islam have come to be the most powerful religions today. First, they establish their god and their scriptures as authorities. Then they demand people to take their god and their scriptures seriously. They encourage people to substitute the need for evidence with faith. They instil obedience. They discourage doubt and enquiry and they enforce regular meetings to keep the faith strong within the minds of their converts. They then proceed to protect beliefs and silence contradictory ideas. In this second part of the podcast, I will continue going through the steps in which these two major religions have come to dominate our way of thinking. This Sunday, 9th of February 2014, Part 2 of Chapter 15 of the Tyranny of God.

Marquez discusses how the two most dominant religions today: Christianity and Islam, have spread. We will see how they achieved this by simply looking at the way their memes work together. We will look at how their belief system is structured to understand what continues to enable and empower them to thrive in the minds of people as parents pass on their beliefs and ideas from generation to generation.

Religions are just human organisations and like other human organisations, they are under pressure to survive. To survive, they need believers to support them financially or otherwise. Thus, they act like memetic organisms. Like viruses, they replicate in the minds of people, influencing the actions and behaviour of people the world over.

Perhaps gods do not exist. We only believe in them if we make ourselves believe in them. We kill and die for these gods. The tragedy is that in our willingness to believe, we end up wasting and squandering our resources and our lives and of others', as we serve and worship these gods we have imagined. Today, Sunday, 9th of December 2013, we will discuss why our ancestors used religion.

It is a common for religious people to say that their god through scripture, gives us a way to live moral lives. But does morality really come from a Divine Being? In this podcast, we delve into this question regarding morality.

In this podcast, I discuss how our ancestors, before they created religions, have come to realise that it is indeed wise to treat others the way you want to be treated. Today, Sunday, 3rd November 2013, Chapter 11 of the Tyranny of God, Why We Are Moral.

It is often said that a particular religion teaches its people how to live moral lives. Many people claim that religion is the metaphorical light that guides people to live wise, moral and satisfactory lives. Is this true though? Are we not moral without religions? Have we not been moral even without religions? These are the sorts of questions I want to delve into today, Sunday, 27th of October 2013, Chapter 10 of the Tyranny of God, Early Human Societies.

TRANSCRIPT

Currently, we are broadcasting the audiobook version of The Tyranny of God. In Chapter 8 we covered memes. Memes include ideas, songs, rituals and jokes. Memes are copied from one brain to another. In Chapter 9, I went through two types of memes: beliefs and delusions. Beliefs and delusions are powerful because they make us act on them. What we believe influences how we treat other people. Individuals can maintain beliefs that are irrational, delusional and destructive. Therefore, just because we believe in something it does not make it true. In the last chapter, we asked, how, then, can we be certain that we do not choose our beliefs simply to delude ourselves in justifying and rationalising our thoughts, emotions, behaviour, attitude and actions?

Many of us suppose that because religious beliefs are adopted by many, they are assumed to be wiser, less deceiving and less misleading. And most of the time, we do not question this do we? People say things like, "I do or do not do this or that because of my religious beliefs". For example, someone might say, "I'm a Jehovah's Witness so I don't believe in Blood Transfusions". Most of the time, we might not advance the discussion further. If we do, we might ask something like, "why not?". The answer we get is usually something we do not comprehend, or find irrational or just confusing. But most people I've noticed, shy away from enquiring further because of not wanting to offend or seemingly ridicule the other person. We will come back to this in later chapters when I will argue that we as individuals and as societies should, and ought to question these beliefs for the sake of finding out what is true.

Before we do that, however, I would like to veer off to another piece of this big puzzle we are trying to put together. It is often said that a particular religion teaches its people how to live moral lives. Many people claim that religion is the metaphorical light that guides people to live wise, moral and satisfactory lives. Is this true though? Are we not moral without religions? Have we not been moral even without religions? These are the sorts of questions I want to delve into today, Sunday, 27th of October 2013, Chapter 10 of the Tyranny of God, Early Human Societies.

In Chapter 8 of the Tyranny of God, we got thinking about memes. We generally defined memes to be anything that we, human beings can copy. Memes including ideas, stories, rituals and parables made up by people and got copied from one mind to another. Over generations, these memes join up with memes that are compatible or they may also make new memes conceivable. The idea that there is a soul for example, makes the idea of life after death, heaven and hell possible. These in turn makes it possible for gods to exist and we looked at all the different conceptions of god throughout the world. Religions embody and codify these conceptualisations of gods which is an argument I will delve into in later chapters.

However, before we proceed further, in this week's podcast, we will first discuss beliefs and delusions because they are two most powerful types of memes that influence our actions, thoughts and behaviour. This Sunday 20th of October 2013, Chapter 9 of The Tyranny of God: Beliefs and Delusions.

TRANSCRIPT

Hello, this is Marquez from Reasonism.Org and welcome to Reasonism Radio. Reasonism Radio is a podcast for free-thinkers, non-believers, Reasonists, atheists and religious believers alike. You can listen to our podcasts by subscribing on iTunes or by visiting our website at Reasonism.Org.

Currently, we are broadcasting the audiobook version of The Tyranny of God. In Chapter 8 of the Tyranny of God, we got thinking about memes. We generally defined memes to be anything that we, human beings can copy. Memes including ideas, stories, rituals and parables made up by people and got copied from one mind to another. Over generations, these memes join up with memes that are compatible or they may also make new memes conceivable. The idea that there is a soul for example, makes the idea of life after death, heaven and hell possible. These in turn makes it possible for gods to exist and we looked at all the different conceptions of god throughout the world. Religions embody and codify these conceptualisations of gods which is an argument I will delve into in later chapters. However, before we proceed further, in this week's podcast, we will first discuss beliefs and delusions because they are two most powerful types of memes that influence our actions, thoughts and behaviour. This Sunday 20th of October 2013, Chapter 9 of The Tyranny of God: Beliefs and Delusions.

Currently, we are broadcasting the audiobook version of The Tyranny of God. In Chapter 7 of the Tyranny of God, we got thinking about language. In our quest to understand human nature and the nature of religions, it is important to realise that language helps if not facilitates much of the way we think. In this chapter, I go through memes. Discussions of memes are important because a few chapters later, I argue that much like living organisms are made up of genes, religions are non-living organisms made up of memes. This Sunday 12th of October 2013, Chapter 8 of The Tyranny of God: Memes.

TRANSCRIPT

Hello, this is Marquez from Reasonism.Org and welcome to Reasonism Radio. Reasonism Radio is a podcast for free-thinkers, non-believers, Reasonists, atheists and religious believers alike. You can listen to our podcasts by subscribing on iTunes or by visiting our website at Reasonism.Org.

Currently, we are broadcasting the audiobook version of The Tyranny of God. In Chapter 7 of the Tyranny of God, we got thinking about language. In our quest to understand human nature and the nature of religions, it is important to realise that language helps if not facilitates much of the way we think. In this chapter, I go through memes. Discussions of memes are important because a few chapters later, I argue that much like living organisms are made up of genes, religions are non-living organisms made up of memes. This Sunday 12th of October 2013, Chapter 8 of The Tyranny of God: Memes.

Last week, we listened to Chapter 1 on Cosmology. Cosmology is the study of the origins and the eventual fate of the universe. We discussed the Big Bang Theory and how the universe began 14 billion years ago. From there, we discussed how matter collected into clouds, which condensed. Smaller structures formed and they began forming bigger structures. We looked at how galaxies may have formed and how, 530 million years after the Big Bang, our very own galaxy -- the Milky Way -- slowly came into existence. Our own star -- the Sun -- formed, along with everything else in our solar system, including our own planet, the Earth, and its moon. Now, in Chapter 2, we fast-forward from when the solar system formed to the beginning of life on Earth. So here now, for you, this Sunday 18th of August 2013, Chapter 2 of The Tyranny of God: The Origin of Life.

TRANSCRIPT

Hello, this is Marquez from Reasonism.Org and welcome to Reasonism Radio. Reasonism Radio is a podcast for free-thinkers, non-believers, Reasonists, atheists and religious believers alike. You can listen to our podcasts by subscribing on iTunes or by visiting our website at Reasonism.Org.

Currently, we are broadcasting the audiobook version of The Tyranny of God. Last week, we listened to Chapter 1 on Cosmology. Cosmology is the study of the origins and the eventual fate of the universe. We discussed the Big Bang Theory and how the universe began 14 billion years ago. From there, we discussed how matter collected into clouds, which condensed. Smaller structures formed and they began forming bigger structures. We looked at how galaxies may have formed and how, 530 million years after the Big Bang, our very own galaxy -- the Milky Way -- slowly came into existence. Our own star -- the Sun -- formed, along with everything else in our solar system, including our own planet, the Earth, and its moon.

Now, in Chapter 2, we fast-forward from when the solar system formed to the beginning of life on Earth. So here now, for you, this Sunday 18th of August 2013, Chapter 2 of The Tyranny of God: The Origin of Life.

In the Preface of The Tyranny of God, I explain that before we get into discussing religion, we need to know what our Natural History is. We must begin from the very start to establish that we are all working on the same page, so to speak. Chapter 1 of the book is titled Cosmology. Cosmology is the study of the origins and eventual fate of the universe. I begin Chapter 1 with the Big Bang, because this is how far back human knowledge goes. So here it is, for you, this Sunday 11th of August 2013, Chapter 1 of The Tyranny of God.

TRANSCRIPT

Hello, this is Marquez from Reasonism.Org and welcome to Reasonism Radio.
I finished recording the audiobook version of The Tyranny of God. The editing and production is complete, and the website is now ready to accommodate it. To celebrate the release of the audiobook, Reasonism Radio is broadcasting the entire audiobook, chapter by chapter, in a series of podcasts.

Each chapter will be available for a week, until the next podcast is released. Reasonism Radio is available on iTunes as a podcast and from our website at Reasonism.Org.

The Introduction and the Preface of the book is already available on our website: here I introduce myself, and the background as to how and why I felt this book was important and went through how the book is structured. If you have not yet heard the introduction and the preface to this audiobook, please head over to www.reasonism.org. In the Top Menu, hover over Publications, then click on The Tyranny of God. Click the round, red button to play the Introduction and the Preface of the book.

In the book’s preface I explain that before we get into discussing religion, we need to know what our Natural History is. We must begin from the very start to establish that we are all working on the same page, so to speak. Chapter 1 of the book is titled Cosmology. Cosmology is the study of the origins and eventual fate of the universe.

I begin Chapter 1 with the Big Bang, because this is how far back human knowledge goes. So here it is, for you, this Sunday 11th of August 2013, Chapter 1 of The Tyranny of God.

This is our very first Reasonism Podcast. Today, I want to share with you a conversation I recently had with a Baptist Pastor. He is visiting from the Philippines with a relative of mine, whom he was grooming to become his assistant. We had a chat about the general state of affairs here in Australia. I was telling them how Australia has been doing fine economically but how recently, the demand for Western Australia’s mining resources have begun to decline as a result of the reduced demand for China’s goods world-wide. Slowly then the conversation progressed to what he thought was going on in the world. Because he is a Pastor, I expected somewhat of a religious tinge to the way he would read current affairs. I did, however, not expect it to be as bizzare as it turned out to be.

Hello, this is Marquez from Reasonism.Org!

This is our very first Reasonism Radio / Podcast. Some people go to church on Sundays to relax and reflect on life in general. I turn on the television and I see a televangelist broadcasting a sermon to an impressive audience, reaching many people all over the world, telling people that Jesus loves them and ask for donations. What do non-believers and freethinkers do when they have some spare time on weekends or Sundays?

For a while now I’ve been thinking of creating a broadcasting channel to reach out to free-thinkers, non-believers, Reasonists and atheists alike. I considered recording videos however it would take too much time and therefore may not be sustainable in the long term. I decided to record podcasts instead, so here we are. Podcasts are a convenient way to broadcast the spoken word, because they are easy to listen to on your smartphones, iPods and mp3 players while in the car or going for a walk.
So let’s get straight to it, shall we?

Today, I want to share with you a conversation I recently had with a Baptist Pastor. He is visiting from the Philippines with a relative of mine, whom he was grooming to become his assistant. We had a chat about the general state of affairs here in Australia. I was telling them how Australia has been doing fine economically but how recently, the demand for Western Australia’s mining resources have begun to decline as a result of the reduced demand for China’s goods world-wide.

Slowly then the conversation progressed to what he thought was going on in the world. Because he is a Pastor, I expected somewhat of a religious tinge to the way he would read current affairs. I did, however, not expect it to be as bizzare as it turned out to be.

He gave indications that he believed there is a global push for a single currency, citing the Euro as an example, and this, in his mind, is a very bad thing. Then he went on to tell about an obscure photo of the Pope. If you were to zoom in this photo, he proclaimed, you can see the numbers 666, which he reminded me, is the number of the devil as stated in a Bible verse he cited.

I was listening. I was quiet. I was trying to follow the logic in his argument. He went on to further list a few dot points which he was slowly working to connect. He believed that these, and other current affairs, are all the doings of an anti-Christ ,who is working his powers in the world today. He did mention atheists as somewhat part of this plan.

In my head I was thinking: ‘Boy, this conversation just took a weird turn’. I sat there listening to get a wider view of his world perspective. I didn’t really know what to say or how to react. After a while, he noticed that I wasn’t inputting much into the conversation, just verbal nods of hms and ah-hah’s.

I don’t know how it happened but all of a sudden, I find myself being asked what I thought about his theory, seeing I have been quiet for most of the last 10 or so minutes. I was thinking, “Do I engage him in a debate? Is it rude to debate him about his beliefs? After all, he is my parent’s visitor and maybe this will not turn out well. But can I, or should I, really allow these ideas to go unchallenged?”

After the debate in my head came to an end, I finally spoke. I said, “I am not quite sure what to think or what to say. You are coming from a perspective that is quiet opposite to where I am coming from. And the gap is wide. I am still thinking about how I can bridge it”.

This statement made him hold back a bit on delivering any more of his fantastical ideas. Then he became curious about what my beliefs were. He asked me about my religion and I told him I was born Anglican and Catholic, because of my parents, but if I were to formally sign a document of my religion, I would put down “none”.
He became even more curious and proceeded to ask more questions which lead to a real passionate, but pleasant, discussion during and after dinner.

I explained to him how imprudent it is for a person to base his entire knowledge on the writings of one book, nodding to the Bible he had opened earlier to support his argument. For example, if it is true that there is a push towards a single global currency, then we can seek explanations for this from other perspectives. The problem with looking at everything from a Biblical perspective is that you see the world through tinged glasses, imbued by your indoctrination. I pointed out that working towards a single global currency is something I doubt will happen anytime within our lifetimes. There are economic benefits for a group of nations to tie their currencies into one, but there are also many arguments in favour of a nation having its own currency. Regardless of how these discussions are going, you can explain things like these by looking purely into economic and political pressures. You do not need to invoke the existence of an anti-Christ nor conspiracy theories to explain current affairs.

I will spare you the rest of our discussion however I would like to share the end that to me was the highlight of that night.
After what might have been 4 hours, it was probably already 10 at night, he said, “okay we better stop this discussion because your cousin might begin to have doubts about the Christian belief and that’s not good because I was rather hoping he would become my assistant”.

I laughed then turned to my cousin who was sitting and following the conversation for most of the time, and said, “Charlie (not his real name of course), if it is the truth you seek, then do not be afraid to know about and read about everything. If you want to know about the true nature of say, Hercules, you do not go and read just one book on the story of Hercules that tells you he was a god. Instead, you go and read about the history of the culture in which he belonged, and about the people who authored his story. You look at independent sources of information. That is how you get to the truth. The same is true with any religion. If you want to understand their true nature, it is not enough you read their holy books, you also need to look into their histories and other resources that are independent of them. The truth always wins, so do not be afraid to pit ideas against each other because that is the only way to find out what is true”.

With that, the night was drawing to an end and the Pastor wound up the conversation with a funny joke about an Atheist, a Buddhist and a Christian. Maybe I’ll share it with you next time. Overall, I found it a pleasant experience to engage a Pastor in a discussion where we could go all out, knowing we were just debating ideas. There was no one watching, apart from my mother and my cousin, so there were no egos on the line. We could focus on debating ideas instead of trying to save face.

This is what I wanted to share with you in this podcast. Please share with us any of your own interesting conversations you had with other people. Your story maybe chosen for publication on our website. I hope you tune in again next time. You can subscribe to our channels on iTunes, on our website at Reasonism.Org, or on YouTube to make sure you don’t miss any of the next podcasts. This is Marquez from Reasonism.Org. Thank you for listening.

atheism

reasonism

religion

christianity

baptist

pastor

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)PodcastsMon, 01 Jul 2013 04:00:00 +1000A Christian Pastor About To Be Killed In Iran For Not Converting To Islamhttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/2663-a-christian-pastor-about-to-be-killed-in-iran-for-not-converting-to-islam
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/2663-a-christian-pastor-about-to-be-killed-in-iran-for-not-converting-to-islam

Pastor Youcef Nararkhani is a Christian Pastor awaiting execution in Iran. His apparent crime: Apostasy. He has an Islamic ancestry therefore, he must remain a Muslim. He was asked to recant his faith in Jesus Christ or die. He has been given opportunities to recant his faith and he refused.

Religions are supposed to be for the well-being of human beings, are they not? If the christian god and the muslim god are supposedly the same, do we suppose that that same god approve of this?

The discussion seems pretty petty doesn't it? If you strip away the fancy religious words like apostasy, recant and faith, we can boil this situation to it's basics, it pretty much goes like this:

A: Stop believing in Jesus, believe in what we believe.

B: No thanks. I like what I believe

A: We give you three chances to say yes

B: No. No. No.

A: Okay then, we kill you

How tragic. This to me, is yet again an example of the attrocities people inflict on each other because of their beliefs in their gods.

Instead of accepting religious and superstitious explanations to the things we do not yet understand, Reasonists rely more on enquiry and the scientific method.

Non-scientists loosely use the word 'theory' in place of words like a 'hunch' or 'guess'. When people hear about 'The Theory Of Evolution', they say things like, "Well, it is just a theory".

In science, however, the word 'theory' is not an individual's hunch or guess that remains unproved or untested. Before something is recognised as a theory, it goes through a rigorous process. We need to understand the process by which scientists come to understand what they purport to know. This is referred to as 'The Scientific Method'.

William K. Tong of the Oakton Community College, in Illinois, provides us with a good definition of The Scientific Method:

"The scientific method attempts to explain the natural occurrences (phenomena) of the universe by using a logical, consistent, systematic method of investigation, information (data) collection, data analysis (hypothesis), testing (experiment), and refinement to arrive at a well-tested, well-documented, explanation that is well-supported by evidence, called a theory".

What we need to recognise is that scientific theories have been observed, tested and verified in many experiments, by many different, independent sources. To explain this process, let us use an example of how a theory is developed using the scientific method:

1) I make an observation: Every time the sun rises, it is always from the east.2) I hypothesise: The sun must rise from the east.3) I test this idea: I will go everywhere I can possibly go and verify that the sun is always rising from the east.4) I publish it: "My research has indicated the sun always rises from the east, wherever it is observed."5) Other people verify it: This research will then be corroborated by others, from all over the world to confirm that the sun indeed rises from the east.6) We agree now that our theory has enough evidence. Out of say, 10,000, independent case studies, we are 100% sure the sun rises from the east. We now have a theory.7) Maybe one day, the sun will begin rising from the west. We cannot know for sure. When it does, we will modify our theory.

As we can see, theories are far from the unproved speculations of a single scientist who just had one too many cups of coffee, late one night. Scientific method is not simply about asserting what you think is true. It may make assumptions but it does not require faith because it simply works with the evidence it has. It is a method that seeks for truth through testing ideas and conducting experiments to verify whether these ideas are true. Ideas are cross-referenced and open for widespread criticism, enquiry and debate. The scientific method requires evidence that is, understandable, relevant, reliable, observable and verifiable.

The most important aspect of a scientific theory is that it must be FALSIFIABLE. It must be clear how and when that theory is no longer valid. In our example above, the theory will remain to be true until someone makes an observation that the sun is rising from another direction. If something is not falsifiable, it is not a true scientific theory. It is a philosophy.

[This is an excerpt from the Tyranny Of God on the Scientific Method, p258]

Morality Does Not Come From Religion Lecture by Marquez Comelab, author of The Tyranny of God organised by The Atheist Society, conducted in the Unitarian Church in Melbourne, Australia. 8th March 2011.

It has always been proposed by the religious that without religion, humanity will succumb to chaos and destruction. In a lecture organised by The Atheist Society in the Unitarian Church in Melbourne on the 8th of March 2011, Marquez Comelab argues that religion is taking undue credit for something that is naturally human.

To argue his point of view, he begins by taking us back to envision ancient societies, discussing the Golden Rule, and three universal truths of human nature that allow, force and pressure us to behave. These three universal truths, he argues, predispose human beings to be moral.

Many people believe that if you do not believe in God, it would be hard for you to know what is right from wrong. But is this true? I believe that religion is getting undue credit for something that is naturally part of human nature.

Tomorrow, I will be discussing following topic: Morality Does Not Come From Religion

WHERE:

The Unitarian Hall110 Grey StreetEast MelbourneVictoria Australia

8th March 2011 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM

The talk will be for about 45 to 60 minutes followed by a Question and Answer session.

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)BlogMon, 07 Mar 2011 19:23:09 +1100God Is Not A Tyrant You Bunch Of Losers!http://reasonism.org/main-content/comments-messages/item/2101-god-is-not-a-tyrant-you-bunch-of-losers
http://reasonism.org/main-content/comments-messages/item/2101-god-is-not-a-tyrant-you-bunch-of-losers

GOD IS NOT A TYRANT YOU BUNCH OF LOSERS!!! HE IS THE PERSON WHO DIED SO THAT YOU COULD LIVE ON THIS EARTH, BUT THEN FOR YOU TO TURN AROUND AND CRUCIFY HIM AGAIN BY TURNING OTHERS AWAY FROM HIM AND CALL HIM A TYRANT IS UNACCEPTABLE, I REBUKE THIS WEBSITE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

REPLY:

First of all, thank you very much for sending us your comment. Before I respond, let me be clear that I am not attacking you as a person, I will be merely responding to the ideas you brought up.

ABOUT THE NATURE OF GOD

"...HE IS THE PERSON WHO DIED..."

This comment brings us to the nature of your God. I can only guess that your god is the Abrahamic God because of your word 'crucify'. You called your god a person. Is he a person? Further, you used a masculine pronoun but is he male or female? Is he both, like some gods are? Or is he sexless?

About the mortality of gods: Can a god die, like you say your god did? We obviously don't think He died permanently right? What's the point of pretending to die when you cannot really die? Is it just for extra dramatic effect?

ABOUT GODS HAVING TO DIE SO WE CAN LIVE

"...HE IS THE PERSON WHO DIED SO THAT YOU COULD LIVE ON THIS EARTH..."

The idea of a supernatural being having to die so his creations may live is similar to some Chinese creation stories like that of Pangu, in Taoism.

There's so much conflict in your ideas and to point them out, I can only do so by asking you questions:

Why did God have to die so I could live? Did He not create us already? I'm guessing your going to mention this thing about our sins right?

Most Christians believe that God sent his Son, Jesus to Earth, so Jesus can be crucified for all our sins, past and future, to be forgiven, by God.

I ask you to think about this for a second. Think about the doctrine of Holy Trinity that says God, Jesus and The Holy Spirit are all the same. This means that to paraphrase what Christianity is asking its people to believe:

God sent Himself, as Jesus, to Earth, so He can be crucified for all our sins, so He can forgive us for our sins.

If you believe this idea of God having to die for our sins and so, we can live with our sins forgiven, why did He not just forgive us our sins in the first place without having to go through such drama?

Further, if you believe that God created everything and everyone and He is all-knowing, did He not know that Judas, including all those who accused and crucified Him, that they were going to do what they did? If you believe that God is all-knowing, then doesn't this make us all as actors just placed here on Earth to perform our roles in God's stage all for His amusement...His entertainment?

ABOUT WHO DOES THE CRUCIFYING

"...FOR YOU TO TURN AROUND AND CRUCIFY HIM AGAIN BY TURNING OTHERS AWAY FROM HIM AND CALL HIM A TYRANT IS UNACCEPTABLE..."

You are assuming two things:

You assume that your god exists. To date, there is no verifiable evidence that gods exist.

You assume that your god is the true god whom others might not be diverted away from.

This is where problems with virile religions begin. They already assume that a god exists even when there is no evidence for His existence. Then they expect us to all agree.

They say that their god is the only true god. Everyone else's gods are false gods. Then they establish that their Scripture is the 'word of their god'. In their scriptures, you find things like:

"I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. You shall have no other gods before me. " (Exodus 20:2-11 and Deuteronomy 5:6-11)

Religions insist there can only be one god: theirs. By framing it this way, they justify any action or behaviour that demeans and brutalises other people, who just happen not to believe to the same absurdities they are being forced to believe.

Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones and cut down their Asherah poles. Do not worship any other god, for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.

Be careful not to make a treaty with those who live in the land; for when they prostitute themselves to their gods and sacrifice to them, they will invite you and you will eat their sacrifices. And when you choose some of their daughters as wives for your sons and those daughters prostitute themselves to their gods, they will lead your sons to do the same.

- Exodus 34:13-16

If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the people around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone him to death, because he tried to turn you away from the Lord your God...

Deuteronomy 13:6-16

"If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned."

- John 15:6

Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal ' rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate.

Koran 9:73

Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you. Deal firmly with them. Know that God is with the righteous.

Koran 9:123

These verses are there for one reason and one reason only: to spread the religion and defeat competing ideas. Throughout our history, religious people have committed atrocities to other people in the name of their religion: from the witch hunts and the Inquisitions of the past, to the modern-day jihadists who seek to destroy you and me just because we live in societies that separate their religion from their governance.

Osama wrote in his letter to the American people:

"The first thing that we are calling you to, is Islam. The religion of the Unification of God; of freedom from associating partners with Him, and rejection of this; of complete love of Him, the Exalted; of complete submission to His Laws; and of the discarding of all the opinions, orders, theories and religions which contradict with the religion He sent down to His Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

... It is saddening to tell you that you are the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind: You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator."

Instead of rebuking this website, perhaps you need to revisit the belief systems and ideas you are defending. Do they truly come from divine origins, from gods themselves, or have human beings confused themselves to a point where they can no longer recognise their myths from their truths?

Islamist terrorism may have its roots in the Middle East, but it has long since expanded globally. Indonesia, the most populous Muslim country, is no exception. Jemaah Islamiyah has for more than fifteen years fought to transform Indonesia into an Islamist state. In recent years, its terrorist campaign has suffered setbacks. As Jemaah Islamiyah regroups, it builds upon the experience of Middle East terrorist groups. From Al-Qaeda, it adopts philosophical underpinnings that guide its dual strategy. From Hamas and Hezbollah, it borrows an "inverse triangle model" in which a broad network of social services supports a smaller jihadist core, and from Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf emirates it adopts a model of charities and NGOs that help Jemaah Islamiyah advance its jihadist goals.

Islamist terrorism may have its roots in the Middle East, but it has long since expanded globally. Indonesia, the most populous Muslim country, is no exception. Jemaah Islamiyah has for more than fifteen years fought to transform Indonesia into an Islamist state. In recent years, its terrorist campaign has suffered setbacks. As Jemaah Islamiyah regroups, it builds upon the experience of Middle East terrorist groups. From Al-Qaeda, it adopts philosophical underpinnings that guide its dual strategy. From Hamas and Hezbollah, it borrows an "inverse triangle model" in which a broad network of social services supports a smaller jihadist core, and from Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf emirates it adopts a model of charities and NGOs that help Jemaah Islamiyah advance its jihadist goals.

What Is Jemaah Islamiyah?

Jemaah Islamiyah's engagement in politics is a cynical short-term tactic in its long-term strategy to eradicate democracy. Founder Abu Bakar Ba'asyir has said, "The democratic system is not the Islamic way. It is forbidden. Democracy is based on people, but the state must be based on God's law?I call it Allahcracy."

Jemaah Islamiyah was founded sometime in 1992 or 1993 by former members of Darul Islam, an Islamist movement that emerged during Indonesia's fight for independence from the Netherlands but that continued armed struggle for more than a decade after independence. Members of Darul Islam grew especially frustrated with their political emasculation under Muhammad Suharto's rule (1965-98). Jemaah Islamiyah's founders, Abdullah Sungkar and Abu Bakar Ba'asyir, conceptualized the group as a covert organization that would topple the secular state through a combination of political agitation and violence. Jemaah Islamiyah's primary founding document, Pedoman Umum Perjuangan al-Jama'ah al-Islamiyyah (PUPJI, The general guidebook for the struggle of Jemaah Islamiyah) outlines the role of clandestine cells and describes the Islamist struggle in terms of guerilla warfare. By the end of the decade, Jemaah Islamiyah had become an Al-Qaeda affiliate, receiving financial and material support from the group. Several top Jemaah Islamiyah operatives even received instruction in Afghan training camps.[1] Soon after its founding, Jemaah Islamiyah became an Al-Qaeda affiliate.

Jemaah Islamiyah sought advantage from the collapse of Suharto's authoritarian rule and Indonesia's descent into a chaotic decentralized democracy. Beginning in 1998, Jemaah Islamiyah launched the "uhud project," whose goal was ridding regions of the country of both Christians and Hindus in order to establish pure Muslim enclaves, governed by Shari?a (Islamic law). Its two paramilitaries, Laskar Mujahidin in the Moluccas and Laskar Jundullah in Central Sulawesi, engaged in sectarian bloodletting against Christians and Hindus until, in 2002, the government was able to broker the Malino accords, enabling a fragile truce. Meanwhile, Jemaah Islamiyah began a bombing campaign in 2000, killing several hundred people, including 202 in one attack in October 2002 at a Bali disco.

Indonesian authorities fought back. Security forces arrested more than 450 Jemaah Islamiyah members, prosecuted over 250 terrorists, and eviscerated the organization's regional cell system. Victory was not complete, however. More than a dozen hardened Jemaah Islamiyah leaders remain at large; some, such as Noordin Muhammad Top, have significant organizational skills. Others, such as Zulkarnaen and Dulmatin, have technical and military capabilities. As recently as June 2008, police raids have netted large caches of bombs and bomb-making material,[2] suggesting that Jemaah Islamiyah's commitment to terrorism remains high.

Justifying a Soft Power Strategy

With the exception of Ali Ghufreon (known also as Mukhlas), awaiting execution for his role in the 2002 Bali bombing, Southeast Asian jihadists have no important homegrown theoreticians. Jemaah Islamiyah has filled the gap by drawing upon the works of Al-Qaeda's three most important thinkers?Abu Musab as-Suri, whose main work is the 2002 tract "Call to Worldwide Islamic Resistance"; Abu Bakr Naji, who wrote the 2004 document "The Management of Savagery"; and Abdul Qadir (Dr. Fadl), who, in November 2007, penned "Rationalizing Jihad in Egypt and the World."

Together, these authors provide theoretical sustenance to Jemaah Islamiyah's revitalization of Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia, a civil society organization affiliated with Jemaah Islamiyah, and other overt organizations. Suri, for example, argued that Al-Qaeda's blanket opposition to democracy was counterproductive and that jihadists should instead work with Islamist political leaders and parties. Naji concurred. "If we meditate on the factor common to the movements which have remained, we find there is political action in addition to military action," he explained. "We urge that the leaders work to master political science just as they would to master military science." Naji's specific recommendations that jihadists be able to justify their actions in Islamic law and reach the people directly without reliance on state media parallel the strategy implemented in Egypt by Sayyid Qutb who, in the Muslim Brotherhood, combined a mass-based movement and a network of covert cells. Jemaah Islamiyah has also adopted the substance of Qadir's tract which argued that most terrorism is illegal by Islamic law, that violent jihad should only be waged in defense, and that fighting Muslim leaders, even those decried as apostates, is illegal unless rebellion would lead to tangible improvement in Muslims' lives.[3]

Today, Jemaah Islamiyah pursues a three-front strategy of recruitment and expansion of cells, religious indoctrination and training of its members, and instigation of sectarian conflict. Indeed, Noordin Mohammad Top wrote an 82-page tract about how to establish jihadi cells on a six-month timetable.

The PUPJI outlines the three phases of jihad: iman (faith of individuals), hijrah (building a base of operations), and then jihad qital (fighting the enemies of Islam). One section of the PUPJI, "Al-Manhaj al-Harakiy Li Iqomatid Dien (The general manual for operations)," states that Jemaah Islamiyah can engage in overt activities in order to proselytize and build a base of support. But the bulk of the document is a guide for clandestine operations and cell-building, the path Jemaah Islamiyah leaders most closely follow.

The Rebound

After the Indonesian crackdown that began in 2003, Jemaah Islamiyah reverted to recruitment and indoctrination for several years, but it has again begun to build a base of operations, especially in Central Sulawesi and the Moluccas. As the group sought to recover from the blows inflicted by Indonesian counterterror forces, debate raged about how to move forward. The International Crisis Group's Sydney Jones, a leading expert on Indonesia, describes factional rifts inside Jemaah Islamiyah between proponents of sectarian bloodletting and those who wish to target the Indonesian government and Western targets.[4] Such strategies, however, are not mutually exclusive. Since 2004, Jemaah Islamiyah has increased bombings, assassinations, and raids on military and police facilities. The November 2005 beheadings of three Hindu schoolgirls was meant to undermine confidence in the state.[5]

By provoking sectarian attacks, Jemaah Islamiyah can broaden its definition of a defensive jihad. Such vigilantism enables it to contend that Jakarta has abdicated responsibility by not coming to the defense of the Muslim community, enabling Jemaah Islamiyah to pursue its goals with greater popular support. Since mid-2006, the Indonesian police have taken seriously the threat of sectarian violence after uncovering documents emphasizing the centrality of sectarian bloodletting to Jemaah Islamiyah's efforts to regroup.

Religious indoctrination has become a parallel component of Jemaah Islamiyah strategy. The group has sent high-level cells to Pakistan for advanced religious training. In 2003, for example, Jemaah Islamiyah sent nineteen children or brothers of high-ranking Jemaah Islamiyah members to study in the Lashkar e-Toiba madrasa, an Islamic school in Lahore, Pakistan, which has ties to the Taliban. Although Pakistani security arrested and deported them in fall 2004,[6] Jemaah Islamiyah has been able to conduct more such training in Indonesia where the group runs a network of approximately sixty madrasas and has launched its own publishing houses: Al-Alaq, the Arafah Group, the Al-Qowam Group, the Aqwam Group, and Kafayeh Cipta Media.[7]

Such a strategy is not unique to Indonesia and, indeed, has been frequently practiced in the Middle East. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood regrouped in the wake of the Egyptian government's mid-1990s crackdown by concentrating on mosques, publishing, and proselytizing.[8] Likewise, for more than a decade before Israeli Arabs became involved in Palestinian violence, the Islamic Movement within Israel maintained its own educational institutions and publication houses in the Israeli town of Umm al-Fahm.[9] Lebanon, too, has become home to a number of Islamist publishing houses.

Jemaah Islamiyah's Inverse Triangle

Like many Middle Eastern Islamist groups, Jemaah Islamiyah has embraced the inverse triangle in which a broad range of charities and nongovernmental agencies (NGOs) serve as cover for a narrower terrorist mission. And like many Islamist groups in the Middle East, as Jemaah Islamiyah regroups, it shows no intention of abandoning its core ideology even as some Indonesian officials wishfully see moderation where none exists. As the organization seeks to rebuild, it becomes an example of how Al-Qaeda affiliates, beaten back by successful counterterror strategies, regroup using both the democratic process they simultaneously fight and the legitimacy naively bestowed by the international community on any organization that calls itself a nongovernmental organization.

Jemaah Islamiyah has adopted a Hezbollah model of social organization in which most of the group's activities are overt charitable work and provision of social services even as a component of the organization clandestinely pursues terrorism. Beginning in the 1980s, Hezbollah, a Lebanese Shi?i political group founded by Iran in the wake of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, began to construct a large network of educational institutions and social services both to complement their military wing and to serve as a recruitment tool. Slowly, Hezbollah built a state within a state in Lebanon, preventing anyone within its territory the option of remaining outside the group's influence. Even as Hezbollah conducts terrorist activities against Israel and within Lebanon itself, many in the international community refuse to define the group as a terrorist organization, in effect arguing that social work is exculpatory.[10]

Hamas has implemented the same model. While Hamas is a lethal terrorist organization that has employed at least sixty suicide bombings since the second intifada began in September 2000, many Palestinians and Europeans argue that the group's network of schools, orphanages, clinics, and social welfare organizations bestows some legitimacy.[11] In Iraq, too, militia leaders pursue the same strategy. Abdul Aziz Hakim, the leader of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, has employed not only the Badr Corps, which has sponsored terrorism and conducted violent operations, but also the Shahid al-Mihrab Foundation, a charitable organization run by his son, Amar al-Hakim.

In Jemaah Islamiyah's case, the base of the inverse triangle is Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia, an umbrella organization for political parties, NGOs, civil society organizations, and individuals committed to transforming Indonesia into an Islamic state.[12] Created in 1999, the organization has an office in Yogyakarta, publishes conspiracy-laden and vehemently anti-Semitic and anti-American books through Wihdah Press and its own magazine, Risalah Mujahidin, lobbies political officials, and in 2001 and 2003, held high-profile national conferences.[13] Muhammad Jibril, son of Jemaah Islamiyah leader Muhammad Iqbal Abdurrahman, runs Ar-Rahman Media, its multimedia publishing house. The use of diverse institutions is deliberate, even as the antipathy toward Indonesian democracy is pronounced. Muhammad Jibril told Al-Jazeera,

We want an Islamic state where Islamic law is not just in the books but enforced, and enforced with determination. There is no space and no room for democratic consultation.[14]

At a November 2006 sermon at a mosque in Kediri, East Java, Jemaah Islamiyah founder Ba'asyir urged his followers to go abroad to wage jihad, though without explaining why. "If you want to go on jihad, do not do it here [Indonesia] but in the southern Philippines or even in Iraq." He said the Bali bombers were legitimate jihadis even if their jihad was "not at the right time or place." Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia may have switched tactics with regard to the desirability of terrorism inside Indonesia, but they have not altered their commitment to violent jihad.

Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia has to some extent become Jemaah Islamiyah's equivalent of Sinn Fein, the political party that existed solely to mirror the Irish Republican Army's aims. Jemaah Islamiyah uses Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia to achieve whatever aims it can through the democratic process. Thus, the Majelis Mujahidin advocates for Islamic law components to all major bills and laws. It seeks, for example, to push Indonesian penal law into conformity with Islamic law[15]and has urged local Islamic communities to lobby regional representatives for Islamic law at the local level.[16] It is a strategy that is both well organized and effective. Nearly forty regional governments have taken steps to implement Islamic law, regulate interaction between men and women, obligate Qur'an reading, and ban alcohol.[17] The group has also pressured the media to replace secular programming with Islamic programming, legislating to force civil servants to wear Islamic dress, and mandating Arabic literacy.

Jemaah Islamiyah's engagement in the political process is a cynical short-term tactic in its longer-term strategy to eradicate democracy. "The democratic system is not the Islamic way," Ba'asyir explained. "It is forbidden. Democracy is based on people, but the state must be based on God's law?I call it Allahcracy."[18] "Islam's victory can only come though da'wa and jihad, not elections."[19] Many of Jemaah Islamiyah leaders hold concurrent positions in Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia, giving themselves a patina of legitimacy and political cover. Since his release from prison in October 2004, Abdurrahman (Abu Jibril), for example, has used Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia as his base of operations. But his message has not necessarily changed. In one recruiting film produced by Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia, Abdurrahman calls on his congregants to wage a violent jihad. Armed with a pistol extended into the air he exclaimed, "You can't just have the Qur'an without the steel. You will bring down the steel."[20] His younger brother remains Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia's director of daily operations.[21]

Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia has grown increasingly confident and combative in dealing with the government, which it accuses of leading a witch hunt against Muslims. Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia has begun issuing "summons," or official complaints, to the police in order to intimidate them and influence investigations of suspected terrorists. In May 2006, for example, it issued a summons to the Indonesian National Police specialized counterterrorism unit, Detachment 88, for their raid on a Jemaah Islamiyah safe house in Central Java, in which two suspects were killed and two others were arrested.[22] As Ba'asyir said, "The struggle for Islam can only come through crisis and confrontation."[23]

Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia also serves as a link between Jemaah Islamiyah and Saudi financiers. Many Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia leaders hold or have held concurrent positions in Saudi charities and their Indonesian counterparts that have been used to support terrorist activities.[24] These include the Saudi Al-Haramain and the International Islamic Relief Organization. Two Indonesian charities, KOMPAK and the Medical Emergency Relief Charity, respectively serve as their counterpart or executing agencies. While U.S. Executive Order 13224 and the U.N.'s 1267 Committee on January 22, 2004, designated the Indonesian branch of Al-Haramain as a funder of terrorism, four months after the designation, Al-Haramain was operating openly in East Java.[25]

KOMPAK

Jemaah Islamiyah used or co-opted many of these charities between 1999 and 2001, during a period of sectarian bloodletting in the Molucca Islands between Jemaah Islamiyah's paramilitaries and Christian and Hindu citizens. Dewan Dakwah Islam Indonesia, a hard-line Islamist offshoot of the Muhammadiyah, the national Islamic organization, established KOMPAK in late 1998 ostensibly to provide relief assistance to people in conflict areas, such as Kalimantan, the Moluccas, and Central Sulawesi. It immediately partnered with the Saudi International Islamic Relief Organization although it recently suffered a setback when, on August 3, 2006, the U.S. Treasury Department designated the Indonesian branch of the International Islamic Relief Organization, along with the Philippine branch and a Saudi director of the International Islamic Relief Organization, for financing terrorism, including Al-Qaeda. The United Nations Security Council 1267 Committee acted in concert although it did not designate the Indonesian branch of the International Islamic Relief Organization as a financier of terrorism until November 9, 2006.[26] While KOMPAK did not engage in conflict directly, its aid won support for Jemaah Islamiyah and its paramilitary organizations such as Laskar Jundullah and Laskar Mujahidin.

Of the thirteen regional directors of KOMPAK, at least three were top-level Jemaah Islamiyah operatives.[27] KOMPAK, however, only came to the assistance of Muslim communities, which it worked to radicalize. KOMPAK officials, while acknowledging that they operate in regions struck by sectarian conflict such as Aceh, Poso, the Moluccas, and Bangunan Beton Sumatra, assert they alleviate the crises and provide necessary relief. They deny any links to jihad activities.[28] In 2003, Indonesian forces arrested several KOMPAK leaders for their involvement in sectarian violence and terrorism; several others went underground.

As with other jihadist organizations and corollary charities in North Africa, Iraq, Chechnya, and elsewhere, KOMPAK's support is not entirely indigenous. It serves as the executing agency of many Saudi and Persian Gulf funds, including from Al-Haramain and the International Islamic Relief Organization.

Aris Munandar, a top KOMPAK and Al-Haramain official, was a key financial conduit between Al-Qaeda and Jemaah Islamiyah. Agus Dwikarna not only served as head of KOMPAK for South Sulawesi but also was the regional branch officer for the International Islamic Relief Organization and treasurer of Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia. Munandar, who was a leading member of Jemaah Islamiyah, used KOMPAK to support both the sectarian bloodletting in the Moluccas and Sulawesi and Al-Qaeda operatives' training of Jemaah Islamiyah members.[29] KOMPAK also produced a number of jihadi videos for fundraising and recruitment purposes.

The Indonesian crackdown broke KOMPAK into disparate cells, but the organization did not cease its commitment to radicalization. One such splinter group, KOMPAK in Ambon, conducted the October 2005 Bali II bombings. Indonesian prosecutors believe that one mid-level Jemaah Islamiyah operative, Abdullah Sonata, received 11 million rupiah (US$15,000) and 100,000 Saudi riyals ($36,500) in 2004 from a Saudi named Syeikh Abu Muhammad to finance militant operations and to send Jemaah Islamiyah terrorists to Mindanao. Other KOMPAK members acquired weaponry with which to instigate a new wave of sectarian bloodletting in Central Sulawesi and the Moluccas.[30] Dulmatin, who is one of Jemaah Islamiyah's leading operatives and has been in hiding in the southern Philippines since early 2004, ordered other KOMPAK members to dispatch suicide bombers to the Philippines. Abdullah Sonata asserted that he sent ten although only four got through.[31]

It is clear, therefore, that the KOMPAK network, funded by Saudi charities, helped develop Jemaah Islamiyah. It also illustrates clearly that terrorist organizations can be created from social networks.

Hambali, Jemaah Islamiyah's top operative in Malaysia, established other charities including Pertubahan el Hassan, as conduits for funds to both Jemaah Islamiyah, its paramilitaries in the Moluccas, and the Medical Emergency Relief Charity. Initially, these charities served as ancillary organizations used to assist with jihadist activities. Over the last two years, however, Jemaah Islamiyah has begun to focus far more on charities. While the Indonesian military has made inroads tracking down terrorist leaders, the Indonesian government has been more willing to tolerate Jemaah Islamiyah charities in the belief that it can wean Jemaah Islamiyah leaders from violence and that it is better to have them involved in overt and nonviolent activities. Jakarta has, therefore, been unwilling to enforce United Nations Security Council 1267 Committee or U.S. Department of the Treasury designations, which make it illegal to raise funds for or donate to any proscribed individual or organization. The Indonesian government's strategy appears to mirror that of the Lebanese government's strategy with regard to Hezbollah. Beirut and many Western powers long tolerated Hezbollah, convinced that incorporating it into the Lebanese government might moderate the group. However, in Lebanon, such accommodation backfired precisely because the charities were only one aspect of a much broader strategy that included immutable commitment to jihad.

Tsunami and Earthquake

The December 2004 tsunami and the May 2006 earthquake in central Java, both massive humanitarian crises, provide a window into just how Jemaah Islamiyah and its charities operate to further Islamist agendas.

On December 26, 2004, an earthquake off the coast of Sumatra caused a tsunami which killed more than 165,000 Indonesians and displaced half a million others. Jakarta, overwhelmed by the magnitude of the disaster, sought to tap Jemaah Islamiyah's social service network. On January 4, 2005, Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia dispatched the first group of seventy-seven volunteers to Aceh from their Yogyakarta based headquarters.[32] Among them was a top Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia official who was a suspect in the October 12, 2002 Bali blast that killed 202 people.[33] Not all Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia personnel were engaged explicitly in humanitarian work; the group indicated that their primary goal was to provide "spiritual guidance" to victims, assist in the reconstruction of mosques, and guard against proselytizing by non-Muslim relief agencies. Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia's non-humanitarian agenda led the Indonesian Air Force to expel nineteen Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia members from Aceh on January 11, 2005.[34]

Abdurrahman's Laskar Mujahidin also used the tsunami to propel itself to new relevance. Founded in January 2000 by Abdurrahman and Hambali, both of whom had experience fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan, the group fielded approximately 500 armed combatants in the Moluccas who were equipped with high-speed motor boats, which they used to attack remote Christian and Hindu communities. After the tsunami, they established four base camps in Aceh including one outside the airport, adjacent to the camps of other domestic and international relief organizations, beneath a sign that read, "Islamic Law Enforcement." Unlike Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia, which was more concerned with providing "spiritual guidance" and restoring "infrastructure in places of religious duties," the Laskar Mujahidin was deeply involved in relief work, including the distribution of aid and especially the burial of corpses.[35] Though the organization is vehemently anti-American, it gave cautious backing to the presence of U.S. and Australian troops.[36] It was clear, however, that their lobbying did persuade the government to call for the early departure of foreign troops.

Joining Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia and Laskar Mujahidin was the Medical Emergency Relief Charity (MERC), an Indonesian executor agency for Saudi funding.[37] Established on August 14, 1999, amidst sectarian fighting, MERC now has twelve offices in Indonesia, concentrated in the regions most directly affected by sectarian violence. In 2000-01, MERC produced two well-publicized jihadi videos for fundraising purposes.[38] While MERC was never directly implicated in supporting Laskar Jundullah and Laskar Mujahidin paramilitary operations to the degree that KOMPAK was, its one-sided approach to the Moluccas conflict, as well as the actions of some individual members, raised suspicions. There is some evidence that MERC received funding from the Indonesian branch of the Saudi-funded International Islamic Relief Organization.[39] MERC operations abroad, in particular in Iraq, the Palestinian territories, Afghanistan, and Chechnya, have also raised concerns about it being a conduit for terrorist funding. MERC sent a team of four doctors and other staff to Iraq in 2003. In 2004, U.S. forces killed one MERC employee, an ambulance driver, in a firefight. The group's website stated that they operate in the tribal areas of Pakistan with the support and permission of the Taliban. Other Islamist organizations such as the Islamic Defenders Front and Hizb ut-Tahrir, though not directly connected to Jemaah Islamiyah, have also become active in Aceh in the wake of the tsunami. Both groups have engaged in sectarian violence.[40]

The Islamist charities flocked to Aceh for three reasons. The first was to garner good press and media attention, providing a needed makeover for groups associated with terrorism and sectarian violence while simultaneously highlighting the secular government's failure. Second, the Islamist charities sought to counter any Western influence.[41] Hence, Din Syamsudin, the head of the quasi-official Indonesian Ulema Council and president of the second largest Muslim organization in the country, Muhammadiyah, who has subsequently acted as a fundraiser for Hamas, warned:

All nongovernmental organizations, either domestic or international ... This is a reminder. Do not do this [proselytize] in this kind of situation. The Muslim community will not remain quiet. This is a clear statement, and it is serious.[42]

Paranoia about Western influence has become a prime motivator for Islamist groups in the Middle East. Prior to the rise of Al-Qaeda, for example, Saudi clergy preached that the Muslim world was subject to a Western "cultural attack" and "intellectual attack." In 1981, the World Muslim League, a Saudi NGO, published a book entitled, The Means of Combating the Intellectual Attack on the Muslim World, which highlighted a theme developed by ?Abdullah ?Azzam, a professor at King ?Abd al-?Aziz University in Jeddah and mentor to Osama bin Laden.[43] Defense against a "cultural NATO" is a theme that Iranian hardliners have also recently adapted.[44] Hence, almost two years after the tsunami, Ba'asyir declared that "naked women are more dangerous than bombs" in his salvo about spiritual pollution and Western culture and values degrading Islam from within.[45]

Third, these groups saw the disaster as an opportunity to proselytize. Several groups in addition to Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia indicated that their primary goal was to provide "spiritual guidance" to victims, ensure that Islamic law was being followed, and to assist in the reconstruction of mosques. With 400,000 refugees and mosques at the center of rural community relief efforts, the potential for influence was great.[46]

The cynicism of the Islamist parties grated on local political movements. While Aceh is nearly 100 percent Muslim, the Acehenese secessionist movement, the Free Aceh Movement known by its acronym GAM (Gerakan Aceh Meredeka), urged the international community to force the Islamist groups to leave in apparent frustration with the government's unwillingness to do so:

We therefore call on the international community to demand that the FPI [Front Pembela Islam] and Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia leave Acheh ? The FPI and Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia are not welcome in Acheh and have never been supported by the Achenese people, nor has their presence been requested. The FPI has been involved in sectarian killings in Maluku and Central Sulawesi and illegal attacks against non-Muslims and others in Java and elsewhere. Their intervention in Aceh is therefore counterproductive.[47]

Tsunami relief efforts provided a template for subsequent operations, most notably in the May 27, 2006 earthquake in central Java. The magnitude 6.2 earthquake killed more than 6,000 people, injured 78,000, and left up to 1.5 million homeless. The United Nations' World Food Program moved quickly into central Java and chose Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia as one of eight partner organizations to deliver ninety-five tons of food aid. The Australian government immediately protested Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia's contract,[48] but World Food Program spokesman Barry Came said, "We don't pick groups to distribute aid based on their religious or political beliefs. We choose based on the ability to deliver, and so far they've performed up to standard. We have no complaints."[49] He backed down, however, under international pressure.[50] Both Ba'asyir and Abdurrahman had been proscribed under U.N. Security Council 1267 Committee lists as specially designated terrorist financiers, and Ba'asyir, just released from prison, was reportedly planning to deliver the World Food Program aid personally.[51]

The episode highlights a major problem facing the West when combating Islamism: The United Nations and international agencies either refuse to perform due diligence or use moral equivalency to justify support for Islamist organizations. Not only do such organizations receive Saudi support as they pursue sectarian radicalization, but too often they also indirectly receive subsidies from Western taxpayers who fund international organizations.

Conclusion

The Hezbollah model is not new to terrorist organizations, but it is new to Jemaah Islamiyah. Jemaah Islamiyah has taken advantage of an opening: Political will in Indonesia to dismantle terrorist infrastructure has waned as the nature of the group's militancy has become apparent. Released from prison, the group's leaders have been able to focus on political, religious, and charitable work. The civilian infrastructure they have developed will make the group?still committed to terrorism?more durable over the long term.

Policymakers in Indonesia need to understand precedent. The existence of charities and social service networks has not made Hamas or Hezbollah any less violent although they have contributed to de-legitimization of governments. The Indonesian government should do what the Lebanese, Israeli, and Palestinian Authority governments did not: They must uproot social networks. Few governments have put forward a comprehensive strategy for dealing with the phenomenon of the inverse triangle, and most disaggregate the terrorist and social welfare arms and fund raising.

There is intense international pressure on the Indonesian government to ban Jemaah Islamiyah, but no politician in the world's largest Muslim community has the political courage to do so. As Indonesia's top counterterrorism official, Ansyaad Mbai, stated, the reason there is no ban on Jemaah Islamiyah "is because the political situation is still very sensitive."[52] Complacency and political expediency rule the day in Jakarta. As long as Jemaah Islamiyah members do not blow things up or simply target Western interests, Jakarta will do little.

It is not just courts and counterterrorism officials who have grown frustrated. A handful of Muslim reformers and liberals have been at the center of a push to rewrite Law No. 8 (1995) on nongovernmental organizations to tighten both the process of NGO incorporation and increase oversight. The proposed law will make fundraising by unregistered (or de-registered) NGOs illegal. The proposed law would make Jemaah Islamiyah's fundraising illegal under Indonesian domestic law.[53]

This unwillingness to take on terrorist infrastructure is regrettable. First, like Hezbollah and Hamas, Jemaah Islamiyah has a long-term timetable. Second, by pursuing overt strategies, Jemaah Islamiyah is able to forge closer ties and common cause with Islamists who might otherwise eschew their violence. Many Indonesians no longer see Jemaah Islamiyah as a radical fringe organization even though the group's agenda has not changed. Third, there is little evidence that Jemaah Islamiyah will abandon terrorism. Tactics may shift, but strategy does not. Herein, Hamas again provides an example that should worry Indonesian authorities. Its assumption of political control in Gaza has not tempered its commitment to terrorism; indeed, Hamas has become even more aggressive since the January 2006 Palestinian elections.

Herein, Washington and other Western governments have an interest. Indonesia may be half a world away from the United States, but any Islamist gains in the archipelago nation will have profound repercussions on U.S. national security. Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in the world, and the United States should not cede the Indonesian population to the same Saudi-funded Islamists who radicalized their Arab brethren, recruited unencumbered for years in Afghan and Pakistani refugee camps, and profess an inflexible hatred of the United States, Israel, and the West. Washington should pressure Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines to uproot Jemaah Islamiyah's overt presence and cede them no political space where they can recruit and indoctrinate anew. Targeting their financial and social networks is essential to the long-term fight against terrorism.

Zachary Abuza is a professor of political science at Simmons College and author of Militant Islam in Southeast Asia: Crucible of Terror (Lynne Rienner, 2003), Muslims, Politics and Violence in Indonesia (Routledge, 2006), and Conspiracy of Silence: Islam and Insurgency in Thailand (U.S. Institute of Peace, forthcoming 2009).

This text may be reposted so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.

religion

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

]]>Main ContentTue, 16 Jun 2009 13:54:46 +1000Do You Know Where The Soul Is?http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1884-do-you-know-where-the-soul-is?
http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1884-do-you-know-where-the-soul-is?"There have been many arguments about the location of the immortal human soul. Could it be in the heart, in the head, or perhaps diffused throughout the whole body -- an all-pervading spiritual quality unique to the human being? The answer, it seems to me as a zoologist, is obvious enough: a man's soul is located in his testicles; a woman's in her ovaries. For it is here that we find the truly immortal elements in our constitution-our genes." -Desmond Morris in The Human Animal (1994).

religion

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)Scientific AdvancesWed, 18 Mar 2009 00:46:19 +1100Unleashed: The Tyranny Of Godhttp://reasonism.org/main-content/item/1845-unleashed-the-tyranny-of-god
http://reasonism.org/main-content/item/1845-unleashed-the-tyranny-of-godFor most of my life, I did not question the existence of God. My wife, most of my family, friends and relatives were all born into Christianity. We can be classified as ?non-practicing' or ?moderate' Christians. We went to church occasionally. When we did, it would be mainly for baptisms, deaths and marriages. The strength of our beliefs varied from believing that God exists to believing that religion is beneficial, regardless of His existence. Does God exist? Should we believe in God? Having an opinion on such big questions seemed inconsequential. We did not see how our lives would be impacted if we were to have an opinion on the matter. For us, there was no urgency. These questions were not as important as getting good grades, finishing studies, getting jobs or taking care of loved ones. Besides, what did it matter? We just had to be good mothers, fathers, sons, daughters and neighbours. All that mattered was that we were good to other people and that we did not inflict injury, harm, or suffering to another human being. The golden rule of treating others the way we want to be treated was our guiding thought, and to us, that was enough. But since last year, I became really curious when I realised that our beliefs, religious or otherwise, impact on our lives and the lives of others. Further, our religious beliefs permeate in everything we think and do. It is at the centre of most global issues we now face. So, I set out for a quest to try and understand our existence and find the answers to questions on God, morality and religion. My journey led me to writing a book. I have not discussed about my journey much in this blog but now that it is done, I will tell you about it. The book is called: The Tyranny Of God. One of my biggest worries in writing this book was the breadth of topics I had to cover. At times, I wondered whether I was doing the right thing in casting as wide a net as I did. I chose to proceed because, to understand the true nature of religion, we cannot limit our discussions to religious texts. Instead, we need to take a larger, macroscopic view. We need to see how it relates to human nature and to our society. We need to consult our sciences and corroborate our analysis with our history. In our struggle to broaden our outlook, we need to start from the very beginning. From there, we work progressively. We will learn about cosmology, abiogenesis, genetics, evolution, language, memes, history, current affairs and so on. The main purpose of this book is not to argue against religion. Rather, it tells our story and how we have come to oppress ourselves with the tyranny of our own beliefs. I wrote this book to include everything I discovered to be relevant in my search for the truth, not just the truth behind God and morality, but also behind us and our existence. Instead of reading this book with the expectation that it is trying to prove the tyranny of God, I would like to recommend you read it as a story book: as a book that tells the story of humanity from the Big Bang. I wanted to make this book easy to read and simple to understand, to the extent that I can in explaining some complex ideas. I also wanted it, regardless of the extensive amount of information, light enough to carry around whilst keeping important information intact. Reasonism.Org, a website dedicated to the subject matter of the book, has been created and is now active. It provides resources, including videos, articles and other relevant material. There is also a forum there where people can discuss and express their thoughts on the deep questions we all ask. Regardless of your religiousity, or lack thereof, I welcome and recommend that you visit it when you can. If you want to submit your stories and opinions there for publication, you may do so. I will be participating in the website as often as I can. I'll see you there.

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)BlogTue, 02 Dec 2008 21:18:07 +1100Local Muslim clerics accusedhttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1841-local-muslim-clerics-accused
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1841-local-muslim-clerics-accusedSOME Muslim religious leaders in Victoria are condoning rape within marriage, domestic violence, polygamy, welfare fraud and exploitation of women, according to an explosive report on the training of imams.The report says some imams apply Sharia (Islamic law) when it benefits men but not when it benefits women, and that they hinder police from pursuing domestic violence charges. (Source)

religion

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionFri, 21 Nov 2008 10:23:04 +1100Clerics condemn Bali bombers after executionhttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1832-clerics-condemn-bali-bombers-after-execution
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1832-clerics-condemn-bali-bombers-after-executionIslamic leaders have condemned the Bali bombers in a bid to quell religious tensions after the three militants died together at the hands of elite Indonesian police snipers in Central Java today...Indonesia was tonight on high alert for terrorist attacks and mob violence, as hundreds of hardline followers gathered in the bombers' home villages in east and west Java to bury the men responsible for the 2002 Bali bombings. (Source)

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionThu, 23 Oct 2008 19:32:27 +1100Powerful Stroke Of Insight By Jill Bolte Taylorhttp://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1802-powerful-stroke-of-insight-by-jill-bolte-taylor
http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1802-powerful-stroke-of-insight-by-jill-bolte-taylorHere is an amazing story you have to listen to. It is about the science of the mind and how we choose to live our lives.
Jill Bolte Taylor

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)Scientific AdvancesSat, 27 Sep 2008 10:27:23 +1000Indian Christians attack Hinduhttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1800-indian-christians-attack-hindu
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1800-indian-christians-attack-hinduBeleaguered Christians in India have "run out of cheeks to be struck" a senior Anglican bishop declared yesterday, on hearing reports that a Christian mob had hacked a Hindu to death in the troubled state of Orissa. Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester, called for peace, and said that the murder, conducted by a knive-wielding mob of 50 Christians, could not be condoned. But he told The Times: ?For months now, scores of Christians have been killed, homes, convents and presbyteries have been burnt down to the ground." He said: "Now one Hindu has been killed, allegedly by Christians. We do not know under what circumstances but it suggests that the worm has turned and the Christian community has run out of cheeks to be struck." (Source)

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionSat, 27 Sep 2008 07:56:13 +1000Terror suspects arrested on German planehttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1797-terror-suspects-arrested-on-german-plane
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1797-terror-suspects-arrested-on-german-planeArmed police officers have boarded a KLM jet just minutes before takeoff and arrested a pair of ethnic Somalis, saying they found a suicide note from the men that claimed the pair wanted to fight in a holy war and die in a terrorist attack. (Source)

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionSat, 27 Sep 2008 07:47:26 +1000Abortion, The Law & The Catholic Churchhttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1796-abortion-the-law--the-catholic-church
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1796-abortion-the-law--the-catholic-churchThe Victorian Law Reform Commission (VLRC), the state's central law reform agency, recommended in March that proposed abortion reform legislation should require doctors who conscientiously object to abortions to refer patients to another provider. The government has followed the advice in its Abortion Law Reform Bill. Catholic Archbishop Denis Hart has said the clause would force Catholic doctors and hospitals to break the law, because they would not provide referrals for the purpose of abortions. (Source)

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionTue, 23 Sep 2008 18:07:16 +1000Girl kills herself over Big Bang fearshttp://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1794-girl-kills-herself-over-big-bang-fears
http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1794-girl-kills-herself-over-big-bang-fearsA teenage girl in India has reportedly killed herself out of fear the world was about to end because of the atom-smashing "Big Bang" experiment" conducted in Europe...But fears have been raised the experiment could create a black hole that would suck the Earth away, although the scientists involved insist the experiment is safe. Fears about the experiment had spread rapidly through the media in deeply religious India, The Daily Mail said. Thousands of people had rushed to temples to pray and fast while others savoured their favourite foods in anticipation of the world's end, the paper said. PERSONAL COMMENT: I am writing a book on this at the moment so I find this very relevant. The new atom smasher is an exciting equipment because it provides a new tool for Physicist to test out there Membrane Theory of the universe. The M Theory is a combination of The String Theory and the Theory of Super Gravity. If they can successfully smash atoms and are able to locate a graviton, disappearing to another dimension, it would be very good evidence to show that the theory is correct. If the theory is correct, then we can have an explanation behind what happened before the Big Bang. It will tie in many mysteries and we will have a scientific Theory of everything that Albert Einstein, himself, dedicated the last years of his life in finding.

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)Scientific AdvancesSun, 14 Sep 2008 09:40:55 +1000 Egypt voices: Sexual harassmenthttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1791-egypt-voices-sexual-harassment
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1791-egypt-voices-sexual-harassmentSeven Egyptian women talk about their experience of sexual harassment on the streets of Cairo. It is an increasingly common problem, with a recent survey suggesting more than four out of five women have been sexually harassed, while nearly two-thirds of men admitted assaulting women. (Source)

"Unlike medication, which was found to have no significant effect on mild cognitive impairment at 36 months, physical activity has the advantage of health benefits that are not confined to cognitive function alone, as suggested by findings on depression, quality of life, falls, cardiovascular function, and disability."

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)Scientific AdvancesWed, 03 Sep 2008 18:50:39 +1000Muslim convicted over teen floggingshttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1787-muslim-convicted-over-teen-floggings
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1787-muslim-convicted-over-teen-floggingsA British court found a devout Muslim guilty of cruelty today for forcing two teenagers to flog themselves until their backs bled during a Shia religious ceremony. A jury at Manchester Crown Court convicted Syed Mustafa Zaidi, 44, on two counts of child cruelty over the incidents, during a ceremony in January to commemorate the death of the spiritual leader of Shia Muslims. (Source)

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionThu, 28 Aug 2008 09:53:52 +1000Disabled siblings hidden for 40 yearshttp://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1786-disabled-siblings-hidden-for-40-years
http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1786-disabled-siblings-hidden-for-40-yearsA Palestinian couple locked their disabled son and daughter in two stinking, urine-stained rooms for four decades out of fear they would ruin the marriage prospects of a healthy child if discovered, police said today... Last year, a 17-year-old youth with mental disabilities who was thrown into a large garbage bin. The boy had scars on his stomach, neck, hands and feet where he'd apparently been tied up...The siblings' father, Ibrahim Musalmeh, married his first cousin decades ago and had eight children - five disabled children who died in childhood, Nawal and Bassam, and another son, who has since married... Arab communities often favour marriages between first cousins as a way of keeping inheritances within the family. It is not considered incest, and there is little awareness that marriage between close relatives increases the chances of having children with disabilities. (Source)

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionFri, 08 Aug 2008 08:37:28 +1000 Martian soil 'could support life'http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1778-martian-soil-could-support-life
http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1778-martian-soil-could-support-lifeMartian soil appears to contain sufficient nutrients to support life - or, at least, asparagus - Nasa scientists believe. Preliminary analysis by the $420m (?210m) Phoenix Mars Lander mission on the planet's soil found it to be much more alkaline than expected... "We basically have found what appears to be the requirements, the nutrients, to support life, whether past, present or future," said Tufts University's Professor Sam Kounaves. (Source)

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)Scientific AdvancesFri, 01 Aug 2008 08:03:53 +1000 Nasa's lander samples Mars waterhttp://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1777-nasas-lander-samples-mars-water
http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1777-nasas-lander-samples-mars-waterNasa's Phoenix lander spacecraft has for the first time identified water in a sample of soil collected from the planet's surface...Scientists will now be able to begin studying the sample to see whether the planet was ever, or is, habitable. (Source) PERSONAL COMMENT: This is a breakthrough. Water, one of the most crucial ingredients of life, is actually found on another planet!

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)Scientific AdvancesFri, 01 Aug 2008 08:01:16 +1000Wave of bombings leaves India's cities on edgehttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1770-wave-of-bombings-leaves-indias-cities-on-edge
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1770-wave-of-bombings-leaves-indias-cities-on-edgeA DEADLY 17-bomb terrorist attack on the Indian city of Ahmedabad just one day after eight blasts rocked the southern city of Bangalore has left Indians wondering which city will be targeted next. Up to 45 people were killed and about 150 injured in Ahmedabad, the largest city in the western state of Gujarat, when bombs went off across the city over 70 minutes on Saturday night. This followed a 35-minute series of bomb blasts across Bangalore on Friday afternoon which left two dead. (Source)

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionMon, 28 Jul 2008 20:47:39 +1000Muslim Polygamists In Western Societieshttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1743-muslim-polygamists-in-western-societies
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1743-muslim-polygamists-in-western-societiesPolygamy is illegal in western countries, including Australia. Marriage is between a man and a woman: not a man and many women. But some muslims have more than one wives. Attorney-General Robert McClelland asserts that this is not to continue. Sheik Khalil Chami says, 'Why not change the law?'. (Source)

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionWed, 25 Jun 2008 16:16:59 +1000Ice Found On Marshttp://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1741-ice-found-on-mars
http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1741-ice-found-on-marsA breakthrough in space exploration: Ice may have been found on Mars. The implications of this, if it is indeed ice opens up a lot of possibilities, considering that water is vital to life. If there is water in Mars then we ask: how abundant is water in terrestrial planets, in our solar system or in others? [youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=t2ssGtZjtkk[/youtube]

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)Scientific AdvancesMon, 23 Jun 2008 20:53:42 +1000First Gay Wedding In An Anglican Churchhttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1736-first-gay-wedding-in-an-anglican-church
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1736-first-gay-wedding-in-an-anglican-churchSo, the Anglican church conducted its very first gay wedding in the UK. "An Anglican church has held a homosexual "wedding" for the first time in a move that will deepen the rift between liberals and traditionalists. Two male priests exchanged vows and rings in a ceremony using one of the church's most traditional wedding rites - a decision seen as blasphemous by conservatives." (Source) The day finally came for gays to be able to wed in church. Not only that, the first couple to be wed were two priests! Who would have thought. Religion is evolving.

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionMon, 16 Jun 2008 22:03:07 +1000Earth-Like Planets Discoveredhttp://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1735-earth-like-planets-discovered
http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1735-earth-like-planets-discoveredScientists have spotted three earth-like planets in a nearby solar system, making them wonder whether earth-like planets are very common in the universe. (Source)

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionSat, 14 Jun 2008 07:34:09 +1000Bacteria make major evolutionary shift in the labhttp://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1726-bacteria-make-major-evolutionary-shift-in-the-lab
http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1726-bacteria-make-major-evolutionary-shift-in-the-labA very important breakthrough has just occurred: evolution in action observed in the world of bacteria: Article.

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)Scientific AdvancesWed, 11 Jun 2008 21:49:34 +1000Bride's virginity a white liehttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1719-brides-virginity-a-white-lie
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1719-brides-virginity-a-white-liePARIS - The bride said she was a virgin. When her new husband discovered that was a lie, he went to court to annul the marriage - and a French judge agreed. The ruling ending the Muslim couple's union has stunned France and raised concerns the country's much-cherished secular values are losing ground to cultural traditions from its fast-growing immigrant communities. (Source)

The search for extraterrestrial life does not contradict belief in God, the pope's chief astronomer said today, adding that some aliens may even be innocent of the original sin...Even if "we don't currently have any proof... the hypothesis" of extraterrestrial life cannot be ruled out, said Funes, a Jesuit priest who directs the Vatican's observatory at Castel Gandolfo, near Rome.

COMMENT: I find this article very interesting considering that back in Galileo's time, scientists were branded as heretics with their telescopes as the tools of evil. Unlike Galileo, who was put under house arrest for the rest of his life because of his discoveries, most scientists and thinkers who ever questioned the belief that the universe revolved around the Earth were killed or that other planets existed were killed.

The law against blasphemy in the UK, which made it illegal to insult Christianity had been lifted.

The reasons are:

1. "The little-used laws served no useful purpose, while allowing religious groups to try to censor artists."

2. Maria Eagle, the junior justice minister, said in the debate: "These offences have now largely fallen into disuse and therefore run the risk of bringing the law into disrepute". "Given that these laws protect only the tenets of the Christian Churches, they would appear to be plainly discriminatory."

COMMENT: It is discriminatory against other religions. If there is a law against blasphemy -- which protects mainly the Christian faith -- then other religions will want their own law that prohibits making fun of their religions as well. If such an environment is pursued, think of what this will create.

There are many religions, each with their own beliefs and often times, they contradict each other and our modern sense of morality. If you were a muslim, you are bound to disagree with some Christian beliefs. If you are a Christian, you are bound to disagree with some muslim beliefs. You should be allowed to express it and debate it with others.

Due to the number and variety of religions, we should be allowed to question each other's beliefs for it is undeniable that they cannot all be simultaneously true. We can only determine which beliefs are useful to us as a society only if we can discuss them in the open.

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionMon, 12 May 2008 20:34:20 +1000Climate expert Stern 'underestimated problem'http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1678-climate-expert-stern-underestimated-problem
http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1678-climate-expert-stern-underestimated-problemLatest climate science showed global emissions of planet-heating gases were rising faster and upsetting the climate more than previously thought, Nicholas Stern [Climate Change Expert] said in a Reuters interview today... "Emissions are growing much faster than we'd thought, the absorptive capacity of the planet is less than we'd thought, the risks of greenhouse gases are potentially bigger than more cautious estimates, and the speed of climate change seems to be faster," he told Reuters at a conference in London. (Source)

religion

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)Scientific AdvancesThu, 17 Apr 2008 15:33:03 +1000Saudis 'threatened Blair with terror'http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1616-saudis-threatened-blair-with-terror
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1616-saudis-threatened-blair-with-terror"SAUDI Arabia's rulers threatened to make it easier for terrorists to attack London unless corruption investigations into their arms deals were halted, according to court documents...The threats halted the fraud inquiry, but triggered allegations that Britain had broken international anti-bribery treaties." (Source: The Age). The word got out because of a few courageous individuals like Matthew Cowie, the case officer on the enquiry, stood up against what was happening. Now, anti-corruption campaigners began a legal action on Thursday to overturn the decision to halt the case. They want the original investigation restarted, arguing that the Government 'caved into blackmail.' Comment: The use of violence in our society remains. This is blackmail at the highest level.

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionSat, 16 Feb 2008 07:43:38 +1100Jihad On Trial In Australiahttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1615-jihad-on-trial-in-australia
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1615-jihad-on-trial-in-australiaIn Australia a group of men are on trial for terrorism activities. According to a news article, the youngest member of an alleged terror group hand-wrote a will at the age of 19 and asked his "Muslim brothers" to fight jihad if the government tried to interfere with it, the Supreme Court was told yesterday. Prosecutor Richard Maidment took the jury through materials found in the terrorists' possessions. They are:

Videos of beheadings by terrorists.

Handbooks on how to make bombs.

Strategies for setting up an active terror cell.

Lists of the joys awaiting Islamic martyrs in paradise.

"Mr Maidment said some of the group's Islamic-library material argued that while suicide was not permitted in Islam, martyrdom was. It was promised that martyrs would have all their sins forgiven from the moment the first drop of their blood was spilled, would speed across the bridge over hell-fire to heaven and would be wed to 72 virgins in paradise." Seventy-two virgins!? I am currently reading Sam Harris's book The End Of Faith. In page 32, he wrote:

Most people in positions of leadership in our country will say that there is no direct link between the Muslim faith and "terrorism". It is clear, however, that Musims hate the West in the very terms of their faith and that the Koran mandates such hatred. It is widely claimed by 'moderate' Muslims that the Koran mandates nothing of the kind and that Islam is a 'religion of peace'. But one need only read the Koran itself to see that this is untrue:

Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate. (Koran 9:73) Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you. Deal firmly with them. Know that God is with the righteous. (Koran 9:123)

Religious muslims cannot help but disdain a culture that, to the degree that it is secular, is a culture of infidels; to the degree that it is religious, our culture is the product of a partial revelation (that of Christians and Jews), inferior in every respect to the revelation of Islam. The reality that the West currently enjoys far more wealth and temporal power than any nation under Islam is viewed by devout Muslims as a diabolical perversity, and this situation will always stand as an open invitation for jihad...Insofar as a person believes that Islam constitutes the only viable path to God and that the Koran enunciates it perfectly -- he will feel contempt for any man or woman who doubts the truth of his beliefs. What is more, he will feel that the eternal happiness of his children is put in peril by the mere presence of such unbelievers in the world.

PERSONAL COMMENT I am a migrant. My parents brought us to Australia for a more hopeful future, away from poverty. I am grateful for Australia and its people to welcome us and allow us to become one of them. People migrate to wealthier countries mainly to improve the quality of their lives. Wealthier countries are where they are today because their culture and their beliefs have managed to shape the political and economic landscape of their country that is conducive to the lifestyle you seek. Before thinking ill of the beliefs and the people of your newly-adopted country, you must at least ask yourself this: If your existing set of beliefs were so good then why did your people fail to build a country where you would want to live in? Could it be that your beliefs might have a tendency to choke any progress being made in education, science, politics, medicine and economics? What if all these things you consider 'evil', actually lead to what makes a nation wealthy? Furthermore, what if they are not evil at all?

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionFri, 15 Feb 2008 15:54:07 +1100Danish Police Thwart Murder Plot By Islamistshttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1612-danish-police-thwart-murder-plot-by-islamists
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1612-danish-police-thwart-murder-plot-by-islamistsIt is quite shocking to hear that certain Islamists plotted to murder a Cartoonist in Denmark for his drawing, published in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten on 30 September 2005. Fortunately, Danish police thwarted their plans yesterday. Today, at least 17 Danish newspapers printed a controversial cartoon of Prophet Muhammed today to stand against fanaticism. "Freedom of expression gives you the right to think, to speak and to draw what you like... no matter how many terrorist plots there are," conservative broadsheet Berlingske Tidende wrote in an editorial. The right to freedom of speech is guaranteed under international law through numerous human rights instruments, notably under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. There are plenty of good reasons why this law was put in place. This is a case example of religion contradicting the moral zeitgeist.

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionThu, 14 Feb 2008 19:13:52 +1100Giant Rat Found In Indonesiahttp://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1590-giant-rat-found-in-indonesia
http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1590-giant-rat-found-in-indonesiaA new species of mammals have been discovered in Indonesia. They look like giant rats, weighing around 1.5 kilos. (Source)

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)Scientific AdvancesTue, 18 Dec 2007 16:07:00 +1100Saudi King Pardons Rape Victimhttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1589-saudi-king-pardons-rape-victim
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1589-saudi-king-pardons-rape-victimIn Saudi Arabia, a 19-year old woman was put in jail for being with a man in a car who was not her relative. Apparently, this is illegal in Saudi Arabia. This fact was established when seven men attacked them and gang-raped her.

Rape under Saudi Arabian law is punishable by law, but from what I understand, the court did not impose it because there were no witnesses and the rapists did not confess to the crime. Furthermore, they also revoked the license of the woman's lawyer and asked the lawyer to appear before a disciplinary panel. (Source)

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionTue, 18 Dec 2007 15:54:00 +1100People Become Terrorists To Add Significance To Their Liveshttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1560-people-become-terrorists-to-add-significance-to-their-lives
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1560-people-become-terrorists-to-add-significance-to-their-livesAccording to a terrorism expert, Marc Sageman, individuals who join terrorist groups have one thing in common before they commit a terrorist act: they have had 'insignificant' lives. He said, "You have a lot of people who are bored out of their minds. Joining this movement brings significance to their lives. Now they are special, part of the vanguard and better than others."(Read the article)

This is interesting because two weeks ago I just blogged about the big reasons offered to try and understand terrorism. If Sageman is correct in his assertions, then it means that even though the leaders of terrorist groups may have some philosophy on why they do what they do, the foot soldiers at the bottom of their ranks are mainly taking part for emotional reasons.

MY THOUGHTS

If a person feels inferior because he believes he is insignificant, or that he is living an insignificant life, it is logical for him to presume that to become someone significant, or to live a significant life, he must achieve superiority over others. However, he is neither significant nor insignificant. He is neither superior nor inferior. These concepts only exist because of his perceptions. The truth is, he is simply himself.

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionTue, 02 Oct 2007 18:12:00 +1000Frigid sperm still works 15 years onhttp://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1302-frigid-sperm-still-works-15-years-on
http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1302-frigid-sperm-still-works-15-years-on"Sperm extracted from mice and testes that have been frozen for as long as 15 years have yielded normal, healthy offspring in a study that researchers say heralds fresh hopes for bringing back extinct species." Source.

religion

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)Scientific AdvancesSun, 20 Aug 2006 22:24:00 +1000Catholic priesthood in declinehttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1215-catholic-priesthood-in-decline
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1215-catholic-priesthood-in-declineThe number of priests worldwide has decreased by 3.5 per cent in the past quarter of a century, the Vatican said, noting that the overall figure was affected by a sharp decrease in Europe despite a rise of vocations in Africa. Read full article here.

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionMon, 01 May 2006 22:54:00 +1000Blood-clotting Protein In Venomshttp://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1160-blood-clotting-protein-in-venoms
http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/1160-blood-clotting-protein-in-venoms"A blood-clotting protein found in the venom of nine snakes, including the taipan and the tiger snake, can be used to stop excessive bleeding during surgery and major trauma, the team of Brisbane based researchers announced*."

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)Scientific AdvancesTue, 28 Feb 2006 22:24:00 +1100Fig Leaf For A Terrorist Authorityhttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1156-fig-leaf-for-a-terrorist-authority
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1156-fig-leaf-for-a-terrorist-authorityPalestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, who wants peace talks with Israel to establish a Palestinian state, says that Hamas might make it difficult, if not impossible, for him to lead. Israel's acting Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni says that Mr Abbas "can't be a fig leaf for a terrorist authority".

Gadis Arriva, a university professor says: "It states it is illegal to express any sexual desire, even imagine sex ? how do you prove that?" she asks. She sees the anti-porn movement as part of an agenda to reshape Indonesia, with pornography a symbol of Western culture to the many Muslims who believe globalisation aims to destroy their culture."

The striking point about this article for me is this: The Balinese people had their own culture, expressed through their art and dance, way before people with different beliefs or religions came to tell them that these forms of expressions should be banned because it went against 'morality'. Should the Balinese stop expressing their culture just because of religion or politics: because some people think nudity is 'bad'? No.

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionSat, 25 Feb 2006 09:21:00 +1100Muslim Imams In Australiahttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1148-muslim-imams-in-australia
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1148-muslim-imams-in-australiaThe Australian Government have proposed a code of conduct to prevent religious leaders from inciting hateful and inflamatory statements and sermons. But Brunswick-based Sheikh Omran, probably the most radical Muslim cleric in Australia (according to The Age), is not going to cooperate.

In next month's summit of imams, Muslim groups are divided whether they should invite him or not. Some do not want him to join the meeting so as not to validate his teachings. One or two imams will not attend if he attends. The imams who want him to attend feel that it is important to keep him engaged. I guess it is important for them to debate and challenge his ideas.

An observant person sees things overlooked by others. A scientist sees things going on and then asks how these goings-on array themselves into patterns, patterns that are reliable and predictable. A really good scientist--or a really good artist for that matter, anyone whose mind and soul are capable of some extension--sees what is going on, sees the patterns, and asks, 'Why?' What underlying forces are at work? How are those forces exerting themselves? How may we understand? Once pried from the universe by a great mind or a discerning heart, the hard-won understanding may then be conveyed and conferred upon humanity at large. A painting is nothing more than light reflected from the surface of a pigment-covered canvas. But a great painter can make you see the depth, make you feel the underlying emotion, make you sense the larger world. That, too, is the power of science: to sense and convey the depth and dimensionality of nature, to glance at the surface and to divine the shape of the universe around us.Carl Safina

Human beings never think for themselves, they find it too uncomfortable. For the most part, members of our species simply repeat what they are told--and become upset if they are exposed to any different view. The characteristic human trait is not awareness but conformity, and the characteristic result is religious warfare. Other animals fight for territory or food; but, uniquely in the animal kingdom, human beings fight for their 'beliefs.' The reason is that beliefs guide behavior, which has evolutionary importance among human beings. But at a time when our behavior may well lead us to extinction, I see no reason to assume we have any awareness at all. We are stubborn, self-destructive conformists. Any other view of our species is just a self-congratulatory delusion.Michael Crichton in The Lost World

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionFri, 03 Feb 2006 17:42:00 +1100Research science short-changed again by Canberrahttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1123-research-science-short-changed-again-by-canberra
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1123-research-science-short-changed-again-by-canberraBased on an article written by Michael Borgas,the Government is still failing to give science the support it deserves.

"...The Federal Government has opted to leave science in the Education and Training ministry, where it has languished with poor support and little interest from the cabinet...CSIRO science differs from that of the universities, with research priorities set by senior executives in consultation with government. Individual researchers must align with long-term strategy. In this way large teams of researchers can tackle problems and initiatives that are important for Australia." See Full Article.

Science is an investment for the future. We need to ensure we are investing enough in it.

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionThu, 02 Feb 2006 17:00:00 +1100Riding the Islamist Tidehttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1122-riding-the-islamist-tide
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/1122-riding-the-islamist-tide"America has pursued the idea that democracy is the answer to Islamist terrorism. Now the Palestinian people have spoken clearly - and they have voted for the terrorists."

"The question is not whether Muslim radicals should be elected to power, but what they do in office and whether they can be voted out"

"The Middle East enters unknown and dangerous territory. This is a time for cool heads and pragmatism, not rash responses."

The Hamas election victory demands a cool-headed international response, writes Anton La Guardia. See full article if you click here.

US President George W Bush says the United States could support a Hamas-led Palestinian government if it abandons its goal of destroying Israel and disarms.

Bush said in the most explicit way to date that the United States could engage with the Islamic militant group which swept to a stunning victory last week in the Palestinian parliamentary election.

"In order for the United States to support a Palestinian government run by Hamas, Hamas must change its party platform and change its way of thinking and get rid of this armed group, as well as change its attitude toward Israel," Bush said.

PERSONAL COMMENT: My comment may not necessarily be for this case but regarding pedophilia in general. What are the causes of pedophilia? Studies are still inconclusive it seems. It is unfortunate, however, for children and for the other priests, that pedophiles seemed to have figured out that becoming a priest provides them the opportunities they seek.

The world is said to be warming because we, human beings, have been emitting tonnes of carbon material into the atmosphere. However, there seems to be an alternative explanation to global warming: the sun's activities might be the catalyst. An Australian senator is pushing for the examination of this hypothesis. (Source)

It seems that the contribution of Solar Flares to the earth's warming is not new and had already been considered, studied and thereafter, rejected, as the main catalyst for global warming.

Scientists in China say they've "reprogrammed" skin cells from adult pigs to behave like stem cells from humans.Engineering cells in pigs provides a way to access the potential of embryonic stem cells without the ethical problems associated with the use of human stem cells, researchers at the South China Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine said Friday. (Source)

PERSONAL COMMENT: This is great news to advance stem cell research. But personally, I think its ridiculous that we have to go to this extent just because of some religions' attitude to stem cell research.Isn't ethical to find cures to diseases that afflict human beings the world over and advance our knowledge in biology, health and medicine?

religion

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)Scientific AdvancesMon, 08 Jun 2009 10:07:45 +1000Some militants respond positively to Obama speechhttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/323-some-militants-respond-positively-to-obama-speech
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/323-some-militants-respond-positively-to-obama-speechIt seems Obama's outreach is having the desired effect. It is a little harder for militant extremists who depend on demonising America and Americans to garner the support and commitment of recruits. In the meantime, Lebanon voted against Hezbollah.

religion

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionMon, 08 Jun 2009 09:59:12 +1000'Where's God' cry as babies perish in firehttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/322-wheres-god-cry-as-babies-perish-in-fire
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/322-wheres-god-cry-as-babies-perish-in-fire"At least 31 small children died, including many who were asphyxiated, after a fire raced through a day-care centre in the north-western Mexican border state of Sonora. 'Where's God? Where's God?' a police commander said as he came out of the centre in tears..." (Source)

This is great to hear: "The young women of Baghdad acknowledge there are more serious concerns in Iraq these days than hair, clothes and makeup. But they also say there might be nothing quite as exhilarating as stepping out of the house in a pretty dress, hair flowing freely behind them, behaving as if their country had not been shattered by war and dominated by religious conservatism for much of their lives". (Source)

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)Scientific AdvancesSat, 06 Jun 2009 18:14:03 +1000Kansas abortion doctor shot to death at churchhttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/316-kansas-abortion-doctor-shot-to-death-at-church
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/316-kansas-abortion-doctor-shot-to-death-at-churchKANSAS CITY, Missouri (Reuters) - A Kansas doctor reviled by anti-abortion groups for his work providing "late-term" abortions was shot and killed in his Wichita, Kansas, church on Sunday, and police said they captured the man responsible. (Full)

religion

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionMon, 01 Jun 2009 14:18:01 +1000Sight restored with stem cell contact lenseshttp://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/315-sight-restored-with-stem-cell-contact-lenses
http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/315-sight-restored-with-stem-cell-contact-lenses"PETER CAVE: Medical researchers at the University of New South Wales are claiming success in curing partial blindness by coating contact lenses with stem cells. The patients with diseased corneas wore the lenses coated with their own stem cells and after about a month their corneas had regrown. The scientists say that in the future the technique may be used to help people blinded by other causes."

The reporting seems to indicate that this finding is the missing link that we needed to confirm that we indeed descended from the apes, the evidence that we need to put Creationism as a failed theory. This, I think confirms for me that most people, even journalists working for major media companies, are not informed that this is merely a 'missing link' in the fossil records, not the missing link to prove that we have a common ancestor with apes.We already have enough evidence, through our studies of the DNA, to say that Creationism, as outlined in The Book Of Genesis, is a theory that contradicts the evidence we have.

A mother accused of praying instead of getting medical help for her dying 11-year-old daughter has been found guilty of reckless homicide. (Source)

COMMENT: If the mother wanted to know whether praying works, here's proof that it does not.

religion

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)The Negative Effects of ReligionSun, 24 May 2009 16:48:28 +1000Alleged NY bomb plotters 'eager to kill Jews'http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/295-alleged-ny-bomb-plotters-eager-to-kill-jews
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/295-alleged-ny-bomb-plotters-eager-to-kill-jewsTHREE American Jihadists accused of plotting to blow up synagogues in New York and attack a US military plane were described in court on Thursday as fanatics "eager to bring death." (Source)

Sexual abuse of children was "endemic" in Catholic boys' institutions in Ireland and church leaders turned a blind eye to it, says a report on mistreatment in church-run bodies dating back to the 1930s. "Children lived with the daily terror of not knowing where the next beating was coming from," the report said. "A climate of fear ... permeated most of the institutions and all those run for boys." (Source)

"The fossil record indicates that birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs during the Jurassic period, around 150 to 200 million years ago, and the earliest known bird is the Late Jurassic Archaeopteryx, c 155-150 Ma. Most paleontologists regard birds as the only clade of dinosaurs that survived the Cretaceous-Tertiary extinction event approximately 65.5 million years ago." (Wikipedia: Bird)

"...T-rex collagen makeup is almost identical to that of a modern chicken - this corroborates a huge body of evidence from the fossil record that demonstrates birds are descended from meat-eating dinosaurs," said Angela Milner, the associate keeper of palaeontology at the Natural History Museum in London. (Source)

Here is an article from Shireen Qudosi, a writer on Islam, discussing the progress of Muslims redirecting their traditional career paths as doctors, lawyers and engineers to take on key roles in media and politics, some of which are pushing for Sharia Law.

FULL ARTICLE

In an April 2004 speech at a Muslim American Society (MAS) conference in Overland Park, Kansas, Dr. Esam Omeish stated that either Islam will 'become the dominant religion of the next century' or 'we may be forcibly rejected from the West because of forces of intolerance, racism, and bigotry'
In 2006, the Muslim American Society made a bold statement at their regional conference in Los Angeles, California, encouraging Muslims to redirect their traditional career paths as doctors, lawyers, and engineers to taking on key roles in media and politics. Speakers hailed media and the political arena as the new battlegrounds where power could be united to forge a Muslim agenda for the United States. One such speaker was Dr. Esam Omeish.

Present at this conference, I found it interesting that while several speakers from the Muslim American Society spoke of a dual identity, being American and Muslim, Omeish's charged rhetoric was distinctly Islamist. Islamists believe Islam is not merely a private faith, but a religious-political movement that should be the basis for governing society.

Fast forward to 2009. Omeish is now a candidate for the 35th district of the Virginia House of Delegates. Omeish's candidacy draws across-the-board scrutiny on the difference between American Muslims and Islamists.

In the United States, many Islamists are mistakenly considered moderates because they work to lawfully indoctrinate Islamic ideology 'by persuasion' rather than force. Such 'progressive' Islamists denounce the violence of groups like al Qaeda and the Taliban, but not the ideology behind them.

Omeish now brings this rhetoric to the voters of Virginia's 35th district, who, on June 9th, will decide whether Omeish should represent them as the Democrat Party candidate. It is critical that Virginians examine Omeish's previous public statements and question his allegiances to determine whether they are in conflict with the duties he will assume should he be elected.

Islamism was founded by Egyptian Hasan al-Banna and the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928. President Barack Obama has called this desire for a global caliphate 'repressive'. Omeish, it seems, feels otherwise. In a 2004 letter from Omeish while president of MAS to the Washington Post, he stated that 'the influence of Muslim Brotherhood ideas has been instrumental in defining our understanding of Islam within the American and Western context.'

An online video captured Omeish calling for 'the Jihad way' at a 2000 rally. He was subsequently forced to resign from his appointment to a Virginia immigration commission in 2007.

Recently, on April 11, 2009, in Oakton, Virginia, Omeish held a 'meet the voters' rally, where he publicly stated Sharia is 'wonderful' for the rest of the world. Sharia, or Islamic law, though differing in specifics from Muslim country to Muslim country, has consistently raised human rights issues regarding women's, minority, and gay rights. In the U.S., such extreme humanitarian violations are not likely.

Islamism is considered dangerous by its critics because it does not hold the U.S. Constitution as the supreme law of the land. Islamists who do not wield a sword or strap on a bomb are more dangerous than violent Islamists because they take advantage of 'soft' political language like minority rights rhetoric in secular democracies to turn those principles on their head once in political power. By encroaching in the public sphere with inpidual innocuous challenges to separation of church and state, Islamists impose their religious beliefs on the rest of society.

Some examples include cab drivers refusing to give rides to inpiduals carrying alcohol in Minnesota, public schools using taxpayer money to provide footbaths in Michigan, and attempts to enforce hijab on Muslims who do not wish to wear them in the UK.

One critic of Islamism is the Responsible for Equality and Liberty (R.E.A.L.) in Virginia. R.E.A.L. focuses on protecting human rights in the U.S. and has denounced Islamist supremacism as a threat to Western universal principles of equality.

Spearheading R.E.A.L., Jeffrey Imm stresses the group is 'focused on tactical issues to educate 35th Virginia district voters on Esam Omeish' so voters can make an informed voting decision in June. Imm believes that a candidate for office should encompass democratic values rather than a supremacist worldview. He stresses that 'we must recognize that supremacist organizations have been leveraging these freedoms to gain institutional support within America by disguising their supremacist goals with 'religious' identities."

R.E.A.L. is planning a rally at the U.S. Capitol challenging Islamist supremacism on Sunday, May 17th. Readers wishing to support or question Esam Omeish's candidacy are encouraged to participate.

IN THE last quarter of 2008, a significant group of Australians was living below the poverty line. For a single person, this meant living on less than $415.06 a week. These people were working full time ? 40 hours a week, and probably much more. They received no employer superannuation and weren't entitled to concessions or pensions.Who were they? Illegal migrant workers? Sweatshop employees unaware of their rights? No ? they were some of Australia's best and brightest minds: PhD students. (Source)

Dr. Jonathan Pararajasingham is a British-born medical doctor specialising in neurosurgery, currently based at Cambridge University's Neurosurgical Unit in the United Kingdom. In this article, Dr. Pararajasingham, explores why religion is so universal.

(FULL ARTICLE)

The debate on religion has reached a bifurcation. Atheist academics, represented by the public figures of the "Four Horsemen" (Dawkins, Dennett, Harris and Hitchens) have made much progress in providing cogent arguments refuting the God Hypothesis. However, their argument tends to address the metaphysical misunderstandings of the public at large. But what about the sophisticated theologian? There still remain a great number of the academic elite who believe in a personal God it seems. Atheists are fond of quoting the results of the poll taken of the world's scientific elite (namely Britain's Royal Society, and America's National Academy of Sciences) which demonstrated 85% of the NAS and 93% of the FRS were irreligious. However, as physicist Neil De Grasse-Tyson once pointed out at the "Beyond Belief" Symposium in 2006, what about the rest who are believers? Here we have a small portion of highly sophisticated thinkers who continue hold religious beliefs. This coupled with the historical, geographical and cultural universality of religion, requires a deeper explanation.

Telos is a Greek word meaning "end" or "purpose". It is the root of the term "teleology" which is the study of purposiveness as used by philosophers such as Aristotle. The telos drive is a hypothetical neuropsychological construct that I propose exists as a primitive instinct which, like all biological drives, may be modulated by higher cognitive function or environmental influences, and often forms the core of religious faith. This concept seems to provide a logical framework and more coherent perspective when considering the origins of this universal phenomenon known as faith. In order to study the question of why religion is so universal, we must step back and examine the phenomenon of assigning meaning and purpose (i.e. teleology) to the universe and indeed human beings.

A common question which often arises in religious discussion involves that of purpose. "What gives your life meaning?" a theist may feel compelled to ask the non believer. This is traditionally assigned a psychological explanation, where the believer is accused of dealing with his or her irrational hopes and fears with various forms of supernaturalism which cannot ever be explained away empirically and are therefore secure as part of the unknown. But perhaps there is a deeper issue here which leads most people to ask such a question; perhaps a deep seated, primitive telos drive is at work, leading us to overzealous assumptions about meaning and purpose in the world around us.

There are a number of evidence-based theories which lend support to the telos drive hypothesis. Studies by cognitive psychologist Deborah Kelemen have shown an innate predisposition to a teleological worldview, where children naturally see the world in terms of design and purpose. She found that preschool children (<6) tend to infer purpose in both living and non-living units, such as lions ("to go in the zoo") and clouds ("for raining") respectively. They instinctively provide (and prefer when given the choice) a purposeful explanation over a physical explanation. Primary school children (6-11) were also found to favour teleological explanations rather than physical ones for natural phenomena. When asked about the origin of animals and people, children have a tendency to provide creationist explanations. Adults in contrast preferred physical explanations for the non-biological phenomena, and teleological explanations for the biological. Kelemen has named this innate tendency "promiscuous teleology."

Other evidence supporting such findings include Csibra's study on infants between 9 and 12 months, who "use the principle of rational action not only for the interpretation and prediction of goal-directed actions, but also for making productive inferences about unseen aspects of their context." There seems to be a developmental change from 9 to 12 months of age in the ability to infer hypothetical (unseen) states of affairs in teleological action representations. Tanya Behne's study in Germany on recognition of intentions showed that infants are able to interpret other people's body-movements as goal-oriented and purposeful, concluding that "infants as young as 14 months of age can, in some situations, interpret an adult behaviour as a relevant communicative act done for them." Such research shows how children are prone to both teleo-functional and intelligent design intuitions which are directly interrelated. This implies an inbuilt cognitive purpose-detector as the root cause of a teleological viewpoint.

We can see how this tendency may result from an "intentional reasoning mechanism" which has developed due to increasing complexity of systems found in the environment, and would therefore be useful in prediction of behaviour. The philosopher Daniel Dennett describes a model of consciousness called the intentional system. When looking at a system from the intentional stance, we assume it possesses certain information (beliefs), that it acts in the direction of certain goals (purpose) and that it always follows the most reasonable action relative to the information and goals. Natural selection shapes brains to explain things (animals and artefacts) as having intention, and so we ascribe intentions to things that matter to us. Everything must be subjected to reason i.e. meaning and purpose.

The anthropologist Pascal Boyer has examined the commonalities between religious traditions throughout history. Rather than finding recurring questions on the creation or life after death as one might expect, instead he found that the idea of "unseen agents" in the environment, which specifically have "intentions" as the most consistent belief among religious institutions. This over-emphasis on intentional forces in the environment, whether attributed to nature, ghosts or dead ancestors, is further evidence that purposeful expectations have been present all the way back to ancient peoples, forming the foundation for most if not all religious traditions.

Jeff Hawkins (inventor of Palm Computing), has developed a brain theory called the "memory-prediction framework". The essence of his idea is that the brain is a sophisticated predictor - a mechanism in which hierarchical regions of the brain predict their future input sequences. Such a machine is able to control the behaviour of an organism by responding to future events predicted from past data (stored in its memory). This change in behaviour is what we refer to as "learning". Higher levels of the cortical hierarchy predict the future on a longer time scale, or over a wider range of sensory input (the higher the level, the more intelligent the organism). Lower levels interpret or control limited domains of experience. This feature is present in the neocortex, a large specialised part of the brain unique to humans. This is why lower species do not possess the same level of intelligence as us, since they have not developed a memory-prediction framework.

The memory-prediction framework corresponds with teleo-functional intuition and the intentional stance, in that they have developed to assign purpose to entities so we may predict their intentions or purpose as a survival strategy, working on the assumption they exist. Normally if an intention is seen, we learn and remember this and are thus able to predict during any subsequent similar encounters. The intention or purpose of the universe or existence does not give any tangible feedback, which may lead to irreligiosity. However, if there are cultural influences, psychological predispositions to transcendence, "messages" from God or the cosmos or if the telos drive is simply strong enough, the greater purpose is vindicated and strengthened.

THE EXAGGERATION OF BIOLOGICAL DRIVES

We can illustrate the concept further by developing a broader contextual framework of human nature. We can compare the telos drive to various analogous human instincts, as summarised in the table below:

Human Trait

Biological Drive

Physiological Controls

Short-term Aim

Long-term Aim

Absence

Appetite

Hunger

Serotonin

Sustenance

Survival

Anorexia

Fear

Anxiety

Adrenaline

Avoiding threats

Survival

Recklessness

Greed

Reward/Risk

Dopamine

Resource accumulation

Survival

Over-generosity

Lust

Sex

Testosterone/Oestrogen

Mating

Survival

Loss of libido

Love

Attraction

Dopamine/Serotonin

Reproduction

Survival

Promiscuity

Bonding

Attachment

Oxytocin/Vasopressin

Parenting

Survival

Polyamory

Morality

Empathy

Mirror neurons

Social cohesion

Survival

Selfishness

Purpose

Telos

Serotonin 2A

Prediction

Survival

Nihilism

Such biological drives are so deep-rooted as a result of our evolutionary history, that the characteristics they give rise to become widespread throughout human society. We become slavishly devoted to such drives, allowing every step of our lives to be one closer to their fulfilment. This occurs almost to the point where our free will is questioned, as we semi-consciously hunt for food, sex, money, love and purpose simply for the strong positive emotional "hit" the brain will reward us with subsequently. Food and sex are more obvious necessary biological drives, but other drives such as those which cause us to seek love or purpose are more complex. However, I argue here that these too have primitive drives fuelling our pursuit of them, leading to the universality and social importance of them which have literally shaped human societies throughout the ages, including our very own.

This instinct to find purpose and intention in the world has been exaggerated and thus misdirected. Biological drives are often given an extra boost to ensure the survival advantages are not missed. For example, the sex drive is boosted to the point of promiscuity in order to ensure mating occurs; the love drive is boosted to the point of infatuation or romanticism to ensure rearing and nurture of offspring occurs; the fear drive can misfire towards anything which seemed to act as a threat in the past, producing (often irrational) phobias; the empathy drive can produce irrational altruism within the group to ensure gene survival.

I would argue that the telos drive is no different; it has been boosted so we assume everything is suffused with intention or purpose so that we may predict the behaviour of the world around us, thus staying ahead of the game we call survival. This exaggeration or boost causes us to see purpose within (human purpose) and without (cosmic purpose).

If this is the case, why is there no evidence that there are such levels of purpose? Looking again at other biological drive mechanisms, we can decide objectively what is rational and what is irrational. For example, love can be described as an extremely irrational mind state compared to polyamory (love for multiple partners), which is more logical. Similarly fear drives produce phobias which cannot be validated as rational anxieties. The strength of a hunger drive for sweets and fats, developed when our ancestors needed to hunt for scarce food, does not lead to the conclusion that such wants are rational in times of plenty.

The telos drive is no different; on the one hand it has developed as a logical survival mechanism. Yet the exaggeration has lead to the false impression that there should be self and comic purposes too. It also leads to irrationally assigning intention to inanimate objects. When you trip over a rug for example, you instinctively curse it as if it has intention. Unfortunately, nothing empirical can validate such subjective instincts, however strong they may be.

REDIRECTING THE TELOS DRIVE: Mortal Purpose vs. Divine Purpose

We now have a situation where we recognise we cannot (and should not) eliminate the drive itself, even if in its boosted state it can give rise to irrational thoughts. Rather we can harness the power of the instincts to improve life, happiness and well being. Love is irrational, but life would be impoverished if we eliminate it; rather we use rationality to prevent harmful effects, such as staying with an abusive spouse or expressing suicidal ideation as a result of morbid love. In the same way we may curb our telos drive by accepting there is no rationality in the belief of some absolute divine or objective individual purpose. Rather we may look to ourselves to find a purpose of personal preference, which conduces to us living life to suit our own personalities, interests and strengths, provided we do not encroach or stifle any other human being's life purposes.

So how do we redirect the telos drive from a focus on God to a focus on ourselves as individuals? Perhaps the best way is to simply recognise that redirecting the telos drive is both healthier and essential for the advancement of human civilisation. Mortal purpose for example encourages people to work for world justice, rather than relying on divine justice. It makes us realise that morality needs justification which we must develop through objective, logical systems. Being moral out of intrinsic human goodness is more laudable than being moral because you will get rewarded for it. Religion dictates warped moral laws which make no sense out of their ancient context. God-given laws promote laziness, non-thinking and essentially, immorality.

Mortal purpose encourages selfless philanthropy, rather than selfish concern about reaching heaven or paradise. Knowing we are mortal and have only one life makes us humble in contemplating our own existence, whereas religion encourages an arrogant spiritual narcissism professing that the entire universe was created for us. One-life purpose encourages accumulation of knowledge through education, whereas belief in God encourages only theological knowledge and time-consuming prayer, ritual and worship. Mortal purpose may also encourage individualism, unlike religion which deems you are part of a flock, with one common purpose. Mortal purpose encourages freedom of thought and expression, whereas religion encourages the idea of totalitarianism, where humans as individuals have had no say in the matter of their creation or how they should live their lives. And most importantly, mortal purpose is based on truth, whereas eternal-life is based on unfounded superstitious belief.

For those interested in truth, an alternative purpose should be encouraged to satisfy the telos drive. The alternative to religion need not be a tragic nihilism, or even a sterile scientism, but rather constructs based on reason such as humanism and moral philosophy. Although numbers of non-believers are gradually increasing worldwide, is must be recognised that this change occurs due to an ongoing theist-atheist debate. Misinformation, lack of education and discouragement of free thought leads to ignorance. It is this ignorance which allows religion to flourish. Many atheists are genuinely puzzled by how theists (including knowledgeable intellectuals) believe in the supernatural given what we know in the 21st century, and why they can remain so passionate about something which one can neither prove nor disprove. I feel the answer lies in the telos drive. This intrinsic drive is a need to find meaning and purpose for which religion (given its immense popularity) is perhaps the most powerful construction. Hence we may develop a less cynical approach when addressing theistic beliefs, since they are founded not merely on psychosocial constructs, but an innate biological need - the telos drive.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Dr. Jonathan Pararajasingham is a British-born medical doctor specialising in neurosurgery, currently based at Cambridge University's Neurosurgical Unit in the United Kingdom. Dr Pararajasingham received his primary medical doctorate from London University, and is working on a BA in Religious Studies at Open University, as well as a PhD in brain cancer stem cell research at Cambridge University. His writing tends to focus on the more exotic aspects of functional brain science such as neurotheology and neuroaesthetics, while surgical interests include the semi-experimental fields of psychosurgery and brain-computer interfaces, which he plans to work on as part of a specialisation in the field of functional neurosurgery. Dr Pararajasingham is of Sri-Lanka.

(This article was first published on Reasonism.Org on Thursday, 14th of May 2009.)

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>jpararaja@doctors.org.uk (Jonathan Pararajasingham)Articles from Other AuthorsWed, 13 May 2009 10:00:00 +1000Modern humans 'evolved on S Africa/Namibian border'http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/281-modern-humans-evolved-on-s-africa-namibian-border
http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/281-modern-humans-evolved-on-s-africa-namibian-borderNew research suggests that the modern human species first evolved in southern Africa, probably near what is now South Africa's border with Namibia. (Source)

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)Scientific AdvancesMon, 04 May 2009 15:58:15 +1000Nerve connections linked to mental declinehttp://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/280-nerve-connections-linked-to-mental-decline
http://reasonism.org/main-content/scientific-advances/item/280-nerve-connections-linked-to-mental-declineAccording to recent studies, our mental decline is more due to losing brain nerve connections instead of loss of brain cells. Therefore, it is important to keep our brains active most especially as we age. (Source)

religion

reasonism

reasonist

atheist

agnostic

atheism

judaism

agnosticism

atheist

agnostic

christianity

christian

richard dawkins

sam harris

christopher hitchens

daniel dennett

marquez comelab

charles darwin

evolution

]]>marquez@reasonism.org (Marquez)Scientific AdvancesMon, 04 May 2009 15:47:49 +1000Jakarta shuffle favours Islamistshttp://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/277-jakarta-shuffle-favours-islamists
http://reasonism.org/main-content/the-negative-effects-of-religion/item/277-jakarta-shuffle-favours-islamistsINDONESIAN President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono is being driven into the arms of the country's Islamic parties, posing questions about the direction of his Government if, as expected, he is re-elected...Mr Yudhoyono's main coalition partner will be the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS), an Islamist party with its roots in Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood movement. At least two other Islamic parties are also expected to join the coalition. (Source)

"KEO is the name of a proposed space time capsule that will be launched in 2010 or 2011. There have been previous spacecrafts carrying time capsules of earth's existence sent into space but what makes the KEO Satellite different is it will be designed to return back to earth 50,000 years later. The KEO project was conceived in 1994 by French artist-scientist Jean-Marc Philippe. If this ambitious project is realized the KEO will carry a drop of human blood chosen at random encased in a diamond, samples of air, sea water and earth and the DNA of the human genome. The satellite will also carry an astronomical clock, photographs of people of all cultures and an encyclopedia of current human knowledge.

Interesting Fact: The Satellites name is supposed to represent the three most frequently used sounds common to the most widely spoken languages today, K, E and O. Also, every person is invited to write a message addressed to the future inhabitants. The deadline is December 31, 2009. Messages can be posted here."

The Westinghouse Time Capsules are two time capsules prepared by the Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Company in 1939 due to be opened after 5000 years.

In it, is the following message from Albert Einstein:

Our time is rich in inventive minds, the inventions of which could facilitate our lives considerably. We are crossing the seas by power and utilize power also in order to relieve humanity from all tiring muscular work. We have learned to fly and we are able to send messages and news without any difficulty over the entire world through electric waves. However, the production and distribution of commodities is entirely unorganized so that everybody must live in fear of being eliminated from the economic cycle, in this way suffering for the want of everything. Further more, people living in different countries kill each other at irregular time intervals, so that also for this reason any one who thinks about the future must live in fear and terror. This is due to the fact that the intelligence and character of the masses are incomparably lower than the intelligence and character of the few who produce some thing valuable for the community. I trust that posterity will read these statements with a feeling of proud and justified superiority.

In August 2008, the Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute and the Strategic Studies Institute at the U.S. Army War College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, jointly published a manual entitled, The American Military Advisor: Dealing with Senior Foreign Officials in the Islamic World.[1]Authored by Michael J. Metrinko, a leading U.S. government expert on the eastern Islamic world, the 95-page manual is a refreshing and blunt how-to guide for civil affairs and political affairs officers, excerpts from which follow. Metrinko brings to bear considerable experience. He was a Peace Corps volunteer in Turkey and Iran and spent fourteen months as a hostage when Iranian students seized the U.S. embassy in Tehran in 1979. Subsequent to the 9/11 attacks, Metrinko reentered government service. After assignments in Yemen and Iraq, he spent four years on provincial reconstruction teams in Afghanistan and eighteen months interfacing with the new Afghan National Assembly as an advisor on parliamentary affairs for the U.S. embassy in Kabul. ?The Editors

The American Advisor

Newly appointed U.S. officials prepare for their first consultation with tribal elders and influential Islamic clergy in Khost, Afghanistan, September 19, 2006. No matter how moral, professional, and correct she might be, an American female officer assigned such duties would have to overcome certain negative assumptions in foreign eyes. The female advisor may be able to overcome these cultural inhibitions, but it will be a difficult, uphill battle, consuming inordinate time and energy and possibly detracting from the advisory mission. U.S. Navy photo.

In the post-9/11 world, an advisory position at the political and strategic level in the Islamic world can have great and immediate consequence for U.S. interests, and can make the American advisor a prime figure in the decision-making process of foreign leaders. The advisor is as likely to be dealing with a civilian counterpart as he is with a foreign military officer, and the range of duties will go far beyond mere military tasks. The position has become a critical one in today's world where stability, peacekeeping, and obtaining civil support are considered equally important to kinetic offensive and defensive operations, and where "nation-building" has become a de facto and integral part of the military mission ?

The American advisor must take care not to let himself be regarded as just another person who has come to pass out gifts in order to curry favor. He must not be regarded as simply a source of material assistance, supplies, high tech presents, and trips abroad under the rubric of training. In resource-strapped Afghanistan, for example, local and even senior officials became accustomed to requesting telephones, office furniture, office supplies, security accessories, equipment of all sorts, vehicles, and a wide variety of other items from Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) commanders, American officials, and other foreign visitors and donors. On many occasions, the Afghans would request the same items from multiple sources. The advisor must look at himself through local eyes and the local culture. If the American officer's "can do" attitude is too highly developed, he may just seem ill-mannered and abrasive to the official and his staff, who often operate at a different tempo than that in U.S. military circles. If he appears to be too young and lacking in authority, the American may be regarded simply as a decorative foreign staff aide who tags along to add luster to the official's entourage.

Age is important in many parts of the traditional Islamic world. For example, the term "white beard" is commonly used in Afghanistan as a term of respect, implying that only someone who has grown old has experience and expertise. Tribal and village elders are the source of advice and authority, not the younger generation, and young men attending a major meeting or assembly are expected to sit silently and listen to the older generation.

When "Tomorrow" Means "Never"

The senior foreign official and the American advisor may have very different concepts of the time necessary to complete an action. Some cultures do not place value on undue haste, and the smart advisor soon learns that "bukra" or "fardo" ("tomorrow" in Arabic and Farsi) or "inshallah" ("God willing" in Farsi/Dari/Turkish and Arabic) often mean that action has been relegated to some other time and place, but probably not any time soon or any place near.

Ignoring the local cultural concepts of timeliness will simply lead to frustration and ultimate failure for the advisor, and cause hidden discomfort and annoyance in his local counterpart in response to his frustration. In the Islamic world, religious holidays and daily prayer times will take precedence over scheduled meetings, and decisions may be made in loose gatherings with endless cups of tea rather than at official conference tables. A meeting may break, even at a critical moment, so that participants can pray as a group. Much of this world falls more into the "Haste Makes Waste" category rather than "The Early Bird Catches the Worm," with many meetings, programs, and social events only drifting towards a start when the senior official arrives ?

An American officer assigned as an advisor normally knows how long his tour of duty will be. From the day that he arrives in-country, he hears a clock ticking off the days left in his assignment, and he may feel a subconscious compulsion to complete a check list of "things to do" in order to satisfy performance goals. His starting point for action is the date of his arrival at post. The U.S. government's fiscal year, his own evaluation report and upcoming meetings, official visits, American holidays, and the normal needs of his family in the United States can all be markers that affect his timing. Looking at his new environment, the advisor may feel that action is vital and should be immediate.

The foreign official, on the other hand, has a different view of time and a different perspective. His focus is indefinite, and he will not be rated on one year's performance. He has been a player in the long process that brought local conditions to their present state and assumes that he will be in power for a long time to come, so he generally will not share the American's sense of urgency. He probably does not share the Puritan work ethic either, and will see little reason to change his habits or his work environment in order to fit a foreigner's conception of what is appropriate. And the official has probably seen a large number of foreign advisors come and go, their names long since forgotten, and their presence leaving only minor or no impact on local conditions.

By the same token, the foreign official's tenure is ultimately uncertain. Because he owes his position to local politics in what is probably a volatile environment, he can be reassigned, disgraced, promoted on a whim, or assassinated. ...

Assigning the Right Person or Right Team

Selecting the right individual to become an advisor is not a simple paperwork assignment process, and involves far more than his having rank and military knowledge. In the bureaucratic world, however, such selection criteria may not be addressed or even understood, and advisors are often chosen for the wrong reasons ...

A young male captain or major may be the best soldier in the world and a great teacher. A female of any high rank may be a paragon of military ability and experience. In foreign eyes, however, they face great initial obstacles, and have a serious disadvantage compared to an older male officer of colonel to general officer rank.

Many foreigners do not accept contemporary American views about rank, gender, age, or race. Insisting that they do so will hinder or doom the advisory mission. It took the United States hundreds of years to reach today's stage in political and social sophistication, and it is counterproductive and illogical to insist that foreign cultures and foreign histories evolve the same way that America has ?

Ethnic background, skin color, and religious faith also play a role, based on local society and tradition. The result may translate into what Americans consider prejudice and discrimination. A good advisor will set a personal example of fairness, but cannot impose his standards on his foreign counterparts.

In traditional Muslim societies, a senior male foreign government official might find it unacceptable to be advised by a foreign female advisor. He might tolerate it on the surface, but would be unlikely in the initial stage to pay serious attention to her advice and might not be comfortable in her presence. The female advisor would find it difficult to accompany the official to many events, and being alone with him would be improper culturally. No matter how moral, professional, and correct she might be, an American female officer assigned such duties would have to overcome certain negative assumptions in foreign eyes. The female advisor may be able to overcome these cultural inhibitions against her success by force of personality and professional competence, but it will be a difficult, uphill battle, consuming inordinate time and energy and possibly detracting from the advisory mission. ?

Life Experience

It is difficult to know by what standards a foreign leader will judge an American. In an introductory conversation with a major and much feared Pashtun warlord in Afghanistan, an American diplomat began by listing the war zones and hardship assignments he had had, tying his life abroad to what hostilities were taking place at the time. But the warlord was oblivious to other countries' conflicts. Then the diplomat noted that over the course of his life he had been held by security officials in the United States and two foreign countries, eventually spending well over a year in prison abroad.

The warlord's single question was about the incident in America, and when told it involved a death, said simply, "then I can talk to you."

Knowing the Local Culture

... Even informal social settings can be a minefield for the unwary, and what is normal and ordinary in the United States might be considered rude, embarrassing, and very detrimental to the advisor's mission. For example, concepts of personal space are different in many Muslim countries, and the American may find himself far too close physically to other men to be comfortable, with guests leaning against him while everyone is eating or simply sitting down to talk. It is not unusual for Muslim men to walk hand in hand, or to hold hands far longer than a quick American handshake would allow. In the United States, men and women will shake hands or possibly even kiss cheeks on first meeting, an act that would be inconceivable by conservative Islamic norms. For example, blowing one's nose in public is regarded as repulsive in Iran and Afghanistan, as much a turn-off as picking one's nose in public would be in the United States.

Asking personal questions about an official's wife or daughter (or describing one's own) might be absolutely routine and acceptable in a Western meeting, but would be considered insulting in a conservative Muslim setting. And in these settings, the American officer who tries to show a foreign counterpart personal photos of female relatives in order to display a common bond of "family" would immediately lose face in conservative Muslim eyes ...

On a trip in a remote part of Afghanistan's Ghor Province, a PRT commander and his political advisor stopped at a small roadside teahouse to talk to the villagers gathered there. The commander, who really did not want to drink anything, politely turned down the offered tea. Turning to the local villagers, the teahouse owner said in Dari, "These foreigners think what we eat and drink is dirty." If the POLAD [political advisor] had not understood the comment and quietly told the commander to accept the tea, the atmosphere would have turned very cold very quickly.

Sometimes hospitality can be carried to extremes. At a Pashtun banquet in northern Pakistan when an American diplomat was guest of honor of a large group of clergy at a refugee camp, a whole roast sheep was carried in on a tray. The bearded host reached his hand under the sheep's tail and pulled out a large wad of semi-raw fat, holding it up to the American official's mouth and saying, "Eat. It's the best part." Swallowing the suet directly from his host's hand with a nod of thanks was the only way to continue the momentum of the conversation.

Foreign Officials' Sources of Income

Sources of national income at all levels may have little relationship to what the Budget Office has in its ledgers. Is the salary structure set by regulation, or is it based on fees for service, on the order of American waiters and waitresses who receive only a token salary from the restaurant owner and make their real income in tips from customers? Is taking a gift or bribe the normal state of affairs? How large can bribes be and still be acceptable, or is it full no-holds-barred in the bribery arena? Is there a well-understood and expected "payment for service" that satisfies both officials and the public?say 10 to 40 percent over and above the published fee?and on which government bureaucrats rely to supplement meager official salaries?

Is it really corruption for a low-level worker, policeman, or soldier to ask for a few dollars as a gift when he would otherwise not have enough income to feed his family? Do workers in the agency have to pay off more senior officers in order to get a job? Is acquiring an office a one-time purchase, or a percentage of the official's salary every month to those higher up the chain? Does anyone in the hierarchy actually receive a living wage, or are they all expected to supplement their incomes by demanding additional money from people who need their service (e.g., contractors or supplicants) or from people who want to get promoted or get better assignments within the official's agency?

In much of the developing world, the Western concept of "conflict of interest" is incomprehensible. Senior officials do not place their assets into a blind trust when they assume office. Rather, many assume office in order to get rich, and paying for office can be a normal procedure at all levels of the bureaucracy, just as enriching their families and friends through their office can be regarded as normal behavior.

In February 2008, Gwyn Prins, a professor at the London School of Economics, and Robert Salisbury, the marquess of Salisbury and a privy counselor, published a breakthrough essay in the RUSI Journal on the incongruity between current British defense discourse and the threat posed by radical Islam.[1] The essay, a portion of which is excerpted below, represents the consensus view not only of the authors but also of ten former military chiefs, diplomats, analysts and academics. As important as are the authors is the place of publication: The Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) sits at the heart of Britain's defense establishment and is recognized internationally as an authority on defense and security issues. Their paper highlights the profound conceptual flaws at the heart of Britain's strategy for combating the threats facing the country, criticism made more devastating by the combined weight and authority of its authors.

In February 2008, Gwyn Prins, a professor at the London School of Economics, and Robert Salisbury, the marquess of Salisbury and a privy counselor, published a breakthrough essay in the RUSI Journal on the incongruity between current British defense discourse and the threat posed by radical Islam.[1] The essay, a portion of which is excerpted below, represents the consensus view not only of the authors but also of ten former military chiefs, diplomats, analysts and academics. As important as are the authors is the place of publication: The Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) sits at the heart of Britain's defense establishment and is recognized internationally as an authority on defense and security issues. Their paper highlights the profound conceptual flaws at the heart of Britain's strategy for combating the threats facing the country, criticism made more devastating by the combined weight and authority of its authors.

The RUSI paper is a direct challenge to current British government policy that pursues a strategy of cultural appeasement in order to buy off?as it believes?the worse prospect of terrorism and urban violence. But the British government's misguided approach merely enables radical Islamism to achieve its goals. By chance, the paper was published during the uproar generated by the archbishop of Canterbury who, on February 7, 2008, suggested that the British state should accommodate Islamic law, so that British Muslims could choose whether to be regulated by English law or Shari?a in certain civil matters.[2]

The public was appalled at the archbishop's prescription for the Balkanization of Britain. But in fact, the British government is already affording Islam a special status provided to no other religion or culture, thus bringing about the development of parallel jurisdictions and the growth of an Islamic state within a state.

Multiple wives of Muslim men can now receive welfare benefits, effectively sanctioning polygamy. Banks now offer "Shari?a-compliant" mortgages, and the Treasury is currently considering the introduction of Shari?a bonds?regardless of the links with terrorism. A number of people serving on the Shari?a advisory boards for British and Western banks have connections with Islamist extremism. In addition, a number of experts have said that Shari?a finance offers an obvious camouflage for terrorist financing.

While the British security service says it is monitoring thousands of British Islamist terrorists and hundreds of terror groupings,[3] the government and many within the security establishment refuse to acknowledge that religious war is the motivation for these Islamists; too often, they describe such terrorism instead in Orwellian terms as "anti-Islamic."

Meanwhile, Ibrahim Moussawi, the head of Al-Manar, Hezbollah's anti-Semitic television station, is welcomed into Britain on a speaking tour, and Hizb ut-Tahrir?banned around the world?continues freely to recruit countless thousands of impressionable young British Muslims to the cause of the Islamic takeover of Britain and the West.

It is against this backdrop that the true importance of the RUSI paper becomes clear. It asserts for the first time that the core problem is Britain's profound loss of confidence in itself. British society is fragmenting under the pressures of multiculturalism, which have paralyzed any attempt to draw a line in the sand against Islamist demands. Both at home and abroad, Britain has lost any shared understanding of the threats that must be faced and how to do so. Indeed, with its steady loss of the power of self-governance to the European Union, there is no longer any clear idea of where political responsibility lies.

In short, the RUSI paper asserts that Britain's security is being put at greater risk from without because British democracy itself is at risk from within. In allowing the progressive fragmentation of British society and the weakening of its military and defense infrastructure, the government has left Britain open to the pincer movement of cultural colonization and terrorist attack. The only solution is for Britain to rediscover its historic identity, restore its power to rule itself, and reassert the mutual obligations between government and people. As such, the Prins and Salisbury paper should resonate not only within Britain but also within other Western countries struggling to balance immigration, assimilation, and identity.

Security

? The security of the United Kingdom is at risk and under threat. The mismatch between the country's military commitments and the funding of its defense moved Lords Bramall, Boyce, Craig, Guthrie, and Inge?five former Chiefs of the Defense Staff?to take the unusual step of raising their concerns publicly in a House of Lords Defense debate on 22 November 2007 ? Security is not only a question for Chiefs of the Defense Staff. It matters to every citizen of the United Kingdom. Security is the primary function of the state, for without it there can be no state, and no rule of law. The former Chiefs of the Defense Staff have stepped outside their traditional reticence to speak on behalf of all. Anxiety about defense and security runs far and wide. This essay addresses the bases of that anxiety: the sources of risk and threat, both overseas and at home. It argues that weaknesses at home, particularly divisions in our attitudes to our defense, contribute to turning risks into threats. It proposes that positive steps to strengthen and update our defense and security efforts involve returning to long established constitutional arrangements of the Queen in Parliament. Thus we may meet the needs of today and tomorrow. ... Repeated assertions by ministers that all is well, that the matter is well in hand and can be safely left to them to manage in-house, no longer carry conviction.

Uncertainty

The electorate is uncertain and anxious ... The "war on terror" is with us now in all its ugliness. Both current military operations and the war on terror together raise a deeper point. Is there any longer a clear distinction between being at war and not being at war? A declaration of war is almost inconceivable today, and yet both our defense and security services are in action against active forces, abroad and at home, at this moment.

The electorate sees this paradox. It also worries about the way we were committed to war, especially in Iraq, and about Washington's sway and leadership. But equally, the electorate is disturbed by an undertow of doubt about the wider muddling of political responsibilities between Westminster and Brussels. Who actually holds, or will take, responsibility for our foreign relations, for our defense, and for our security? Who?for instance?should guarantee our borders?

Such uncertainty should be of primary concern because it weakens the bond between government and the governed, which is precisely what terrorists seek to achieve and what other enemies of the United Kingdom will exploit. For this reason, it is not enough for anyone (even Her Majesty's Government) to say, "Don't worry, we have it in hand." The uncertainty has to be addressed. The confidence and loyalty of the people are the wellspring from which flows the power with which all threats to defense and security are ultimately met. Our constitutional arrangements and institutional dispositions must both deserve and grow out of that loyalty and confidence. The present uncertainty suggests our arrangements need review and renewal.

Risk and Threat

Latent risks can become patent threats. What marks the change of a risk into a threat is usually the emergence of a factor which has been misjudged. It has been the reduction of traditional threats (aggression from nation states) combined with the increase of possible risk factors (most notably, Islamist terrorism, but there are many others) which has so destabilized world affairs and increased uncertainty. But linked to these changes is a loss in the United Kingdom of confidence in our own identity, values, constitution, and institutions. "This England that was wont to conquer others," wrote Shakespeare, "hath made a shameful conquest of itself." This is one of the main factors which have precipitated risks into threats. As long as it persists, it will have the power to do so again. Islamist terrorism is where people tend to begin. The United Kingdom presents itself as a target, as a fragmenting, post-Christian society, increasingly divided about interpretations of its history, about its national aims, its values and in its political identity. That fragmentation is worsened by the firm self-image of those elements within it who refuse to integrate. This is a problem worsened by the lack of leadership from the majority which in misplaced deference to "multiculturalism" failed to lay down the line to immigrant communities, thus undercutting those within them trying to fight extremism. The country's lack of self-confidence is in stark contrast to the implacability of its Islamist terrorist enemy, within and without. We live under threat. We sense that now is a time of remission, between the frontal attack of 9/11, and its eventual successor, which may deliver an even greater psychological blow. Significant though they were in their different ways, neither the 2004 Madrid train bombings (which affected a national election), nor the London Underground and bus bombings of July 2005 (which exposed the weakness of the "multi-cultural" approach towards Islamists) were that successor. Thus, we are in a confused and vulnerable condition. Some believe that we are already at war; but all may agree that generally a peace-time mentality prevails. In all three ways?our social fragmentation, the sense of premonition, and the divisions about what our stance should be?there are uneasy similarities with the years just before the First World War.

We are fortunate in not having the specific external state enemies who once posed threats to the British state and against whom we could therefore define ourselves. There has been no straight substitution of the Cold War threat with another threat of different source but similar type. But the range and nature of the threats to the security of British citizens in 2008 are not confined solely to what the Islamists call their "jihad" against the West.

A shifting complex of risks faces us. An adequate approach to Britain's security in the next few years must address questions that are intricate, delicate, and strange to our conventional way of thinking. The familiar categories of "home" and "abroad," which have long reassured the British in a deep part of their national identity, are breaking down. We know much less about what threatens us and how it does so than our official policies assert.

The use by Westerners of the word hudna highlights an anomaly. Whenever journalists, diplomats, or commentators covering the Middle East use a non-English word, it will almost always be Arabic or perhaps Persian; seldom do they use any Hebrew words. Never has a U.S. or British newspaper, for example, used the Hebrew word for cease-fire (hafsakat esh). This is odd as Israel is the other side to these cease-fires. The majority of Arabic terms reproduced in Western language newspapers are concerned with either military topics (jihad, mujahideen, fida'iyin, shahid)[1] or religious affairs (fatwa, mulla, ulema, ayatollah, Shari?a, Allahu akbar).[2] There is nothing wrong with borrowing Arabic words. However, doing so without understanding the word's nuance and historical development will render deficient any understanding of that word's true meaning.

The use by Westerners of the word hudna highlights an anomaly. Whenever journalists, diplomats, or commentators covering the Middle East use a non-English word, it will almost always be Arabic or perhaps Persian; seldom do they use any Hebrew words. Never has a U.S. or British newspaper, for example, used the Hebrew word for cease-fire (hafsakat esh). This is odd as Israel is the other side to these cease-fires. The majority of Arabic terms reproduced in Western language newspapers are concerned with either military topics (jihad, mujahideen, fida'iyin, shahid)[1] or religious affairs (fatwa, mulla, ulema, ayatollah, Shari?a, Allahu akbar).[2] There is nothing wrong with borrowing Arabic words. However, doing so without understanding the word's nuance and historical development will render deficient any understanding of that word's true meaning.

Here, it might be possible to consider hudna somewhat of an exception?it can be translated accurately as truce or cease-fire. Its contemporary usage ? at least in English and other European languages ? is exclusive to the conflict between Israel and its adversaries, whether Islamist terror groups in Gaza, the West Bank, or southern Lebanon, or states such as Syria. In Iran, it is used alongside the Persian term aramesh.[3] Still, hudna retains a historical context that colors its meaning, if not in Western papers, then in Arabs' understanding.

The concept of hudna deserves a close look: It is not a Qur'anic term, nor is it the only Arabic word for a cease-fire or truce; others include: muhadana, muwada'a, muhla, musalaha, musalama, mutaraka, and sulh. But hudna is the most prominent. It is the first word used in Muslim history to mean cease-fire, specifically in the context of the seventh century Truce or Treaty of al-Hudaybiyya, often termed the Sulh al-Hudaybiyya (peace of al-Hudaybiyya).

Named after a village outside Mecca, the truce came six years after Muhammad and his followers abandoned Mecca for Yathrib, today's Medina. This move, known as the hijra (emigration) is of enormous significance for the classical understanding of jihad, inasmuch as it sets a pattern of retreat followed by regrouping and rearming, which permits an attack on the territory previously left behind.[4] In March 628 C.E., Muhammad and his followers sought to return to Mecca to perform a pilgrimage. At Hudaybiyya, Muhammad "marched till he reached al-Hudaybiyya which lies at the limit of the Haram [sacred territory of Mecca] area at a distance of nine miles from Mecca."[5] Muhammad and the rulers of Mecca, most of whom had yet to convert to Islam, negotiated a truce, the essence of which was to permit the Muslims to return unarmed on pilgrimage each year for the next decade. It came to an end two years later, however, following an infraction by a tribe allied to the Meccans. In 630, Muhammad entered Mecca with a small, armed force and took the city peacefully. Hudna, in other words, amounted to a temporary truce.

Today, radical groups and conventional Muslims alike often use the term hudna when they divide areas not controlled by Islamists into a realm of Islam (dar al-Islam) and a realm of war (dar al-harb),[6] or pagan ignorance (jahiliyya). The leading exponent of this latter concept was Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb (1906-66) who, in his 1964 treatise, Ma'alim fi ?l-tariq (Milestones), wrote:

Lastly, all the existing so-called "Muslim" societies are also jahili societies. We classify them among jahili societies not because they believe in other deities besides God or because they worship anyone other than God, but because their way of life is not based on submission to God alone. Although they believe in the unity of God, still they have relegated the legislative attribute of God to others and submit to this authority, and from this authority they derive their systems, their traditions and customs, their laws, their values and standards, and almost every practice of life.[7]

For Qutb's fellow travelers and intellectual successors, Muslim countries that are not theocracies?any state except Iran, Saudi Arabia to a limited degree, or Sudan?are treated as though they had reverted to paganism.

Fear of Fitna

Over the course of history, hudna became the standard term to describe a cessation of hostilities during jihad. Muslims distinguished the hudna from other forms of disengagement, such as those applied to tribal feuds, clashes between city factions, rebellions against the monarch or his provincial governors, or fitna, sedition or civil strife. Fitna was the greatest fear of classical Muslim society, which aspired above all things for perfect order both under a caliph or sultan and under religious law as mediated by the ulema or religious scholars, and, more narrowly, the fuqaha or jurisprudents.[8]

By being unaware of fitna, most journalists ignore something vital to the course of Islamic civilization and the development of Islamic thought. For all the greatness of their architecture, scholarship, and literature, traditional Islamic societies were prey to disintegration. Muslim societies lacked the stability of China. Western societies overcame such tensions by creating nation-states. This did not mean that either Chinese power or European states remained constant over time, only that they were remarkably stable when compared to Muslim dynasties?at least those that arose before gunpowder enabled leaders to retain control through sheer force.

In practice, a unitary Islamic empire ruled by a single caliph lasted for only a short time. When Muhammad died in 632, he was succeeded by the first of four "rightly guided" caliphs. Together, these men ruled the state of Islam for about thirty years although only one died peacefully in his bed.

Fitna began during the reign of the fourth caliph, ?Ali, regarded by the Shi?a as the first of their twelve imams. But more than religious divisions split the Islamic world. Upon ?Ali's death, the caliphate passed to the Damascus-based Umayyad dynasty (661-750), then to the Abbasids (750-1258) who built a new capital in Baghdad. As the Abbasid caliphate weakened, minor dynasties rose to dominate regionally throughout the greater Islamic empire. The caliph may have remained the nominal overlord but, in practice, he had little power.

Abbasid rule?and, in some ways, the caliphate itself?came to an end when a Mongol army killed the last caliph and sacked much of the imperial city. But, since the tenth century, the empire had suffered factionalism and the rise of new dynasties paying only symbolic allegiance to the caliph in Baghdad. The Mongol attack ended even the illusion of unitary rule, and led to a steady flux and reflux of dynasties. Competing armies made life insecure in many parts of the Islamic heartland. The Ottoman revival of the caliphate was more symbolic than actual; the caliphate?which Atat?rk abolished in 1924?never again approached the power of the sultans or regional leaders.

These smaller Islamic polities were in constant flux, leading to regular episodes of fitna and a need to establish truces between warring parties, which generally recognized one another as Muslims. This phenomenon was famously identified and studied by the fourteenth-century Muslim sociologist, Ibn Khaldun, who argued that a cohesive society became weak through decadence, eventually allowing its conquest at the hands of barbarians, who in their new position would grow civilized, only to become weak in due course themselves.[9] The late economic historian Charles Issawi and University of Kentucky philosophy professor Oliver Leaman summarize Ibn Khaldun's argument:

Ibn Khaldun sees the historical process as one of constant cyclical change, due mainly to the interaction of two groups, nomads and townspeople. These form the two poles of his mental map; peasants are in between, supplying the towns with food and tax revenue and taking handicrafts in return. Nomads are rough, savage and uncultured, and their presence is always inimical to civilization; however, they are hardy, frugal, uncorrupted in morals, freedom-loving and self-reliant, and so make excellent fighters. In addition, they have a strong sense of ?asabiya, which can be translated as "group cohesion" or "social solidarity." This greatly enhances their military potential. Towns, by contrast, are the seats of the crafts, the sciences, the arts, and culture. Yet luxury corrupts them, and as a result they become a liability to the state, like women and children who need to be protected. Solidarity is completely relaxed and the arts of defending oneself and of attacking the enemy are forgotten, so they are no match for conquering nomads.[10]

Ibn Khaldun's observations were accurate, but they were not what Muslim clerics and statesmen wanted to hear. For them, the ideal of a single umma (the international community of believers) remained an essential guide to how the world was supposed to work. God perfected His religion in Islam, and therefore, it was logical that Muslims would progress steadily through to the end of time. Progress would occur externally through conquest and conversion, often through trade and preaching, while internally, Islam would enjoy consolidation. The notion of the rise and fall of Islamic states was disturbing to Muslims: How could men speak of a single umma when Islamic lands were divided into multiple polities? And, in the absence of a unitary state, where was the religio-political order that Muhammad had created?

Such perfection could not be achieved so long as Muslim states fought Muslim states. A single, recognized authority for the realm of Islam was necessary to counter such divisiveness. It is significant that the only major schism to divide Muslims, the rift between Sunnis and Shi?a, began, not over a theological point, but rather over an argument as to who was the true leader of the faith.

The House of Islam

Particularly for those on the fringes of the realm of Islam, one of the principal ways in which the Islamic state was able to assert its sense of strength and ever-advancing rule was by waging jihad. Jurists agreed that the caliph or another legitimate ruler authorized by the caliph should raid contiguous non-Muslim territory once a year in order to convert unbelievers or force their submission. Numerous jihad states came into being, their existence justified only by their undertaking of the communal duty to fight unbelievers.

Should a Muslim victory seem remote, the caliph could declare a truce in the interests of the umma. Rudolph Peters, Islamic law professor at the University of Amsterdam states, "According to some schools of law, a truce must be concluded for a specified period of time, no longer than ten years."[11] Hanafi law, however, permits the Muslims to terminate a truce arbitrarily: The "imam may denounce the armistice whenever the continuation of warfare is more favorable for the Moslems than the continuation of peace," he continues.[12] Such a truce is necessary when the Muslims are weak relative to their enemies. It can also occur when there is fitna within an Islamic state.[13] These truces serve as protection against further violence to enable Muslims to regroup and gather their strength, whereupon they can issue a fresh declaration of jihad. Such a treaty is a hudna, distinct from sulh where the non-Muslim state pays tribute to a more powerful Muslim one, or an ?ahd, a covenant of security, in which protection for Muslims is reciprocated.[14]

Many Westerners still find it hard to grasp the fact that Islam is not a religion in either the Judeo-Christian or Far Eastern sense. Because Islam draws so heavily on Jewish and Christian personalities and norms, it can be easy to miss the extra dimension it possesses. The philosopher and social anthropologist Ernest Gellner (d. 1995) explained:

Islam is the blueprint of a social order. It holds that a set of rules exists, eternal, divinely ordained, and independent of the will of man, which defines the proper ordering of society. ? These rules are to be implemented throughout social life.[15]

It is a highly prescriptive religion in which church and state are never wholly separated. Rabbinical Judaism is a similarly prescriptive and legalistic faith but, until the creation of the state of Israel, had no bearing on any post-classical state. And since the nineteenth century, Judaism has produced movements (Conservative, Reform, and even humanistic) consciously responsive to the changing needs of modern society, something Islam has yet to do.

For pious Muslims, Muhammad did not just bring a message for the salvation of men's souls but also a call (da'wa, proselytizing for Islam)[16] for the creation of a divine society on earth. To the extent that Islam offers salvation, it has to come through the act of conversion?but whether voluntary or forced makes no difference. By virtue of reciting the profession of faith ("I bear witness that there is no god but God, I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of God"), the convert is saved from death and is guaranteed a place in paradise. The term islam itself means "submission" and applies both to the individual's submitting to God and a society's acceptance of conquest by Muslim armies. Thus, the dar al-Islam (the realm of submission) signifies territory ruled (or once ruled) by Muslims while territory ruled by unbelievers is dar al-Harb (the realm of war) although some jurists hold that territory under the rule of unbelievers may be treated as dar al-Islam if the infidels allow Muslims to worship freely and perform other religious duties.

The salvific community is, strictly speaking, the Islamic umma, an overarching nation whose membership depends not on nationality, language, race, or tribe but only on faith. Jews and Christians who have refused to convert but have accepted the role of dhimmis, protected but restricted peoples, live and work within the umma but are not members of it. Unlike immigrants into modern Western states who acquire citizenship after a certain number of years, dhimmis can only become full citizens of an Islamic state by converting. Thus, the Baha'is in Iran and Egypt, the Ahmadis in Pakistan, and Christians throughout much of the region remain second-class citizens and are citizens of the nation-state alone. In Egypt, until 2008, even native-born Baha'is were unable to obtain identification cards that would allow them to access a wide range of public services, including health care and education.[17] The expulsion of Jews from all Arab countries after 1948 was prompted by religious considerations, given that those expelled were not Israelis, and the countries involved had suffered no territorial loss. Perceived from the perspective of the European Westphalian state system, the establishment of Israel was a legal outcome of the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire and the creation of a group of short-term mandates, but throughout the Islamic world, it has been perceived as a lesion because it damages the umma.

All societies have a "Golden Age," a time when a just ruler presided over happy and prosperous subjects, when the weather was always fair and peace assured. Some religions dream of a future age when heaven is reflected on earth. Islam is no exception, but its chief framework for such visions is the umma and the belief that Islam will one day conquer the world. However it happens, such a conquest will lead to the normalization of the world within Islam.

This is apparent in a contemporary interview with Ayat Allah Kamil, a young Palestinian woman who had tried to carry out a suicide bombing. Her Israeli interviewer asked, "Do you have any dreams for the future?" She responded, "Of the world becoming Islamic, a world in which we will all live in peace, joy, and harmony, all of us, human beings, animals, flowers, plants, and stones. Islam will even bring peace to vegetables and animals, the grass and the stones ... And you'll be able to remain Jewish, whatever you want; it doesn't matter but in an Islamic world."[18]

This extraordinary?and sad?expression of faith shows how real it is for Muslims to believe in Islam, not just as something in their hearts, but as a universalist, unifying presence. The problem is that this unification of the spiritual and social realms does not happen in practice. Ibn Khaldun explained this better than anyone before or since. After discussing the cyclical nature of the rise and fall of states, he opined on the importance of religion. Issawi and Leaman explain,

Religion can influence the nature of such a model; when ?asabiya is reinforced by religion, its strength is multiplied, and great empires can be founded. Religion can also reinforce the cohesion of an established state. Yet the endless cycle of flowering and decay shows no evolution or progress except for that from the primitive to civilized society.[19]

What Went Wrong?

In the modern period, these disparate strands come together in a special way that makes this the most critical epoch in Muslim history. By the eighteenth century, if not earlier, Muslims were no longer among the most powerful peoples. In the twentieth century, almost all the old Muslim assumptions about mankind's direction were abolished. Most Muslim countries passed under Christian control, a direct contradiction to the doctrine of Islamic supremacy.

By the end of World War I, not only had the last Islamic empire dissolved, but a hodgepodge of new nation-states replaced it. This contradicted the principle of a single umma and made the execution of any form of defensive jihad against the conquerors difficult. There was no single leader to unite all Muslims to combat the infidel. The kings and presidents who took the mantle of the new states and owed their thrones to Western intervention had no wish, let alone the ability, to carry out jihad.

This led to tension between Islam and the nation-state. New rulers in Turkey, Iraq, Syria, and elsewhere demanded allegiance to the state before religion. Prior to this, the idea of a traitor to the nation-state was meaningless. According to Christine Schirrmacher, academic director of the Islamic Studies Institute in Bonn:

Since apostasy in Islam is not merely a private or ecclesiastical affair (by withdrawal of church membership, for example) as it is in Western society, the state must act. Apostasy is treason towards Moslem society (the "Umma") and the undermining of the Moslem state, for Islam is the buttress of society and the state itself. Apostasy erodes and shakes the foundations of the order of society?because it is treason, the state must prosecute it.[20]

This rankled the pious. To become the ally of a Christian power contradicted everything for which Islam stood. If Christians were allies, impregnable, or in a long-term treaty relationship, what would happen to the doctrine and practice of jihad? What would happen to the mission of making the entire globe one Islamic entity? In this context, the establishment of Israel rankled. The long-despised Jews not only had a national home but one built on land that Muslims considered to "belong" to Islam since the Arab conquests of the seventh century. Against such an abomination, jihad could be the only solution.

Attitudes had evolved over time. During the 1930s, Palestinian Arabs under the leadership of the Hajj Amin al-Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem, had embraced a great deal of Nazi ideology.[21] Many Arabs still take inspiration from the Third Reich, and Arab speech and iconography have borrowed heavily from European anti-Semitism. The Jew became the hook-nosed subject of Der St?rmer newspaper and Nazi propaganda films. He became a master conspirator working on the orders of a secret cabal, a myth imported from Russia and still widely disseminated in bestselling Arabic translations of the literary fraud The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Recent pictures show Hezbollah fighters, Fatah members, and Palestinian Authority policemen using the Nazi salute.

However, this acquired anti-Semitism creates numerous problems for Arab anti-Zionists. Western anti-Semitism is racist; not even a Jew who had abandoned his faith or converted to Christianity was spared by Hitler's racist doctrine of the Jew as ?ntermensch. Whereas a Jew under Islam had the options of conversion or life as a dhimmi, a Jew in German-occupied Europe had no choice at all. Once Israel was established, Arabs became anti-Semites and called not only for the extermination of Israel but also for the annihilation of all Jews living there. This has made the possibility of a truce even more remote since it has an all-or-nothing quality similar to Hitler's "Final Solution."

In addition, Muslims had to contend with more than the military power of Europeans. The Christians and, later, the Jews, had advanced materially, intellectually, and politically. They had parliaments, constitutional monarchies, republics, a free press, countless inventions, the ability to travel the globe at increasing speeds, universities, technological colleges, effective medicine, science, and women who played a role in public life.

This disparity is well demonstrated by the immense gap that has opened up between Muslim and Jewish achievements in the arts and sciences. Jews, with a worldwide population of 13.3 million, have garnered no fewer than 164 Nobel prizes; Muslims, on the other hand, with a population of some 1.4 billion, have won a total of six prizes in a small number of fields, the same number as the Irish.

For intelligent Muslims around the world, there is a pressing sense of having been let down by history. How, for example, is it possible, that a country such as Iran?one of the most civilized and creative countries on the planet, a culture that has created some of the greatest literature on earth, with a vibrant art and architecture, perhaps the greatest cuisine in the Middle East, music of great sensitivity and power, and a language that has spread throughout Central Asia and down through Afghanistan into India?has made no serious contributions to the modern world outside of cinema?

What went wrong? Muslims face a horrid choice: Either God is punishing them for some collective sin, or God has abandoned them. It is unthinkable that communities like the Christians and Jews, whom Islam teaches to be inferior, or even outright idolaters such as the Japanese should enjoy the good things that had been promised to the Muslims in the Qur'an.[22] But, there is a flip side: If enough Muslims believed that God is punishing them or had abandoned them, faith would be undermined, and Islamic society would break down.

Sayyid Abu'l-A'la Mawdudi, founder of Jamaat-e-Islami, a Pakistani Islamist political party, argued that any Islamic polity has to accept the supremacy of Shari?a over all aspects of political and religious life in order to establish a truly Islamic government. His analysis associates jihad with anticolonialism and "national liberation movements" and paved the way for Arab resistance to Zionism and Israel to be considered jihad.

This clearly has not occurred. Jihadist treatises such as Qutb's Milestones, Sayyid Abu A'la Mawdudi's "The Islamic Movement," or Taqi al-Din Nabhani's Nizam al-Islam (The system of Islam) have filled the intellectual hole. Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb preached a jihad not just against the West but against what he saw as a backsliding, corrupt, and "non-Muslim" Islamic world. Governments that did not implement the Shari?a (Islamic law), women who did not veil, those who listened to Western music, those who gambled, fornicated, or drank alcohol?all fell under the condemnation of jahiliyya (pagan ignorance). Such logic enabled militant Muslims to justify their doctrine of ongoing jihad even though Islamic weakness dictates a cessation of hostilities, at least in the form of a truce. Such beliefs have led inexorably to the current wave of Al-Qaeda terrorism and to the continuing aggression of Hamas and Hezbollah.

There is a tendency by some Western commentators and journalists to forward moral equivalency in the name of balance. A 2005 Guardian article, for example, argued that both Israelis and Palestinians should acknowledge the harm they have done to the other and concede that both parties deserve blame.[23] More recently, fewer Israeli casualties in Sderot are "balanced" against greater Palestinian loss of life in Gaza even though the first is the result of terrorism against a civilian population and the latter of actions taken in defense of a sovereign state.

The status of Palestinians as victims remains a central plank in their platform to the present day. The Western audience may have become accustomed to such claims, but they are a historical anomaly. Until recently, Sunni Muslims never conceived their history around victim status?quite the opposite, in fact. Their view of history was, until recently, triumphalist. They have conquered; they have converted, and they have built empires. Islamist texts and sermons are replete with a new form of triumphalism: a refusal to concede that Muslims have moved to a state of inferiority, or that Jews or Christians have put them there. A recent cartoon on Hamas's Al-Aqsa television depicts a small child as he stabs George Bush to death and turns the White House into a mosque.[24] Such programs are fantasies that fill the minds of Arab children with impossible dreams.

Just as fantastic are the hundreds of conspiracy theories that proclaim a belief in hidden forces that sap the strength and suck dry the veins of Muslims. These conspiracies depict Muslims as the true victims of the modern age. Take, for example, this excerpt from the Kuwait Times:

[Professor Ali Mazrui] said that Muslims are victims of violent injustice elsewhere in the world without the globalisation of anger against the United States. Muslims in Kashmir and Chechnya in their struggle for self-determination are victims of the wrath of state security forces, he cited, for example. Muslims in Macedonia are trying to cope with discrimination from Christian Macedonians; Muslims in Kosovo are facing the risk of reintegration with Yugoslavia against their will; Muslims in Afghanistan faced the Soviet Union earlier and defeated it; the Afghans have now endured military action by the United States.[25]

Many in the modern Muslim diaspora focus on the concept of Islamophobia, conflating criticism with fear and justifying violent reaction to any offense, real or imagined, that has few parallels with any other religious community. Psychologically, the combination of an unyielding belief in Muslim superiority and a paranoid belief in the power of satanic Jews and impious Christians is a major factor in preventing Muslims from advancing. Blame is placed entirely on outside forces; there is little individual or group accountability.

Modern Hudna

What does this mean for the present hudna, or any that is likely to follow it? The jihad is waged against the entire world, but Israel has become its focus. Since the jihad is deemed unending, and since Israel is going to stay, there will be no end to the religiously-inspired struggle. The Hamas covenant, for example, is unequivocal: "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through jihad. Initiatives, proposals, and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."[26]

The best that the international community can hope to achieve is a political solution, but this cannot occur unless a way is found not only to control the violent tendencies of the extremists but also to rework Muslim theology and social thought. There is no Muslim equivalent to Reform, Conservative, or Reconstructionist Judaism. Almost all the great Muslim thinkers of the last century have been deeply conservative.

For Muslims, the challenge is to move from a worldview that sees all other religions and all non-Muslim people as inferior, Satanic, ignorant, and subject to Muslim conquest to one that coheres more closely with modern thinking in Europe, the Americas, and the Far East, where there is competition between nations and corporations, but where religious hatred is increasingly relegated to the history books. Others may have to abandon similar prejudices, but the extent of Islamic terrorism, its link to the provisions of the Shari?a, and the gulf between Islamic thinking on human rights and the norms of the original Declaration of Human Rights,[27] justify concentration on Islamic intolerance as a special problem. It is surely time for leaders to emerge within the Muslim world capable of guiding their people towards peace and humanity. A long-term truce between Israel and the Palestinians would surely be a good start.

However, it is difficult to see how Israel or the West can have confidence in Hamas's long-term aims. Its position suggests a wholesale rejection of any mediated, peaceful resolution of the conflict.[28]

Can Western governments do anything to prevent a new hudna running its usual course? Diplomats may propose carrot and stick strategies, offering financial and political incentives to dismantle the culture of violence with disincentives for any return to killing. In the end, though, the onus is on the Palestinians and their allies. If they could impose a hudna on their own side and not fire Qassam and Grad rockets, smuggle weapons, or infiltrate suicide bombers into Israel, there could be a chance for Gaza to develop. But such a scenario is a pipe dream so long as Hamas remains a viable entity.

Denis MacEoin holds a Ph.D. in Persian studies from the University of Cambridge. He taught Arabic and Islamic Studies at Newcastle University and was for many years an honorary fellow at Durham University. He is currently the Royal Literary Fund Fellow at Newcastle University and author of The Hijacking of British Islam (Policy Exchange, 2007).

The commotion stemmed from the fact that Mattson is the president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), an organization with close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, which was labeled last year by the U.S. Justice Department as an un-indicted co-conspirator in U.S. v. Holy Land Foundation, a Hamas terrorism financing case.

Mattson's overt affiliation with ISNA created only a fleeting political liability in Denver, but she may pose a longer-term danger to the wider American public.

Mattson is a professor at the Hartford Seminary, where she teaches Islamic law and Islamic history. Through this position of authority, Mattson has obfuscated the threat of radical Islam, numbing her students and the American public to a dangerous ideology.

For example, it is no secret that Wahhabism is a radical Islamist ideology responsible for a great deal of the anti-Western violence produced in the Muslim world. Yet, in a CNN chatroom interview in 2001, Mattson stated that Wahhabism is "a reform movement" that "really was analogous to the European protestant reformation." Inaccurately, she claimed that "the Saudi scholars who are Wahhabi have denounced terrorism," despite the fact that many continue to teach its virtues.

Islamic-terrorist sleeper cells in the U.S. carried out al-Qaeda attacks on September 11, 2001. Last year, the director of national intelligence explicitly expressed "worry that there are sleeper cells in the U.S.," and cited specific concerns about increased al-Qaeda capabilities on American soil. Yet, only two months earlier, Mattson insistently told the Baltimore Sun that the supposition that terrorist sleeper cells exist in this country, "is not true. There aren't any sleeper cells."

Mattson's apologia may seem egregious, but it is fairly standard stuff in her profession. Americans have become increasingly aware of the way in which professors of Middle Eastern studies whitewash the dangers of radical Islam.

What might be more surprising is the extent to which Mattson publicly and proudly associates with a notoriously Islamist cause like ISNA. This makes it more difficult for her to portray her Islamist leanings as "scholarship."

As Mattson wrote in a book she published in 2002, "People of faith have a certain kind of solidarity with others of their faith community that transcends the basic rights and duties of citizenship." In other words, Mattson implies that the Muslim identity transcends the American identity.

In the same book, she also questions the very character of America. "There is no guarantee," she writes, "that Americans will rise to the challenge of defining themselves as an ethical nation."

It is this cynical approach to America, along with her Islamist ideals and associations, that made Mattson a political liability in Denver.

Sadly, she is just one example of the way in which Islamism has penetrated American universities, and even U.S. politics.

Jonathan Schanzer, an adjunct scholar atCampus Watch, is director of policy for theJewish Policy Center, and author of the forthcoming book Hamas vs. Fatah: The Struggle for Palestine.

Combating radical Islam requires understanding the lawful or peaceful means Islamists use to spread their doctrines. Islamism is a threat to America because it does not accept the principles of general religious freedom, as protected under the U.S. Constitution. Rather, it has a totalitarian agenda that does not recognize national boundaries or the separation of religious dictates from the social, political, and economic governance of society ? including the private lives of its citizenry. The Islamist view of law is based on Shari'a (Islamic law), not the American Constitution.

Combating radical Islam requires understanding the lawful or peaceful means Islamists use to spread their doctrines.

Islamism is a threat to America because it does not accept the principles of general religious freedom, as protected under the U.S. Constitution. Rather, it has a totalitarian agenda that does not recognize national boundaries or the separation of religious dictates from the social, political, and economic governance of society ? including the private lives of its citizenry. The Islamist view of law is based on Shari'a (Islamic law), not the American Constitution.

The central strategy of Islamists in the West is lawful Jihad, or soft Jihad. This Jihad is non-violent and proposes to work through a society's existing institutions to gain social and political influence, and then introduce Islamic law into society. Specific methods include lobbying, Islamist lawfare, libel tourism, seeking special, unreasonable accommodation in the name of religious freedom, and most importantly, radical missionization.

One of the key tools used by Islamists to spread their message and recruit individuals is that of aggressive proselytizing ? thus distinguishing Muslim converts who are on a personal spiritual mission to Islam from those being indoctrinated towards a political ideology is a key task. Combating the latter begins with keeping a vigilant eye on Islamic organizations and the materials they disseminate to potential converts.

The Islamic Circle of North America, or ICNA, is one such organization that crosses the line, considering its "welcome package," which includes a video and a series of books reviewed below.

ICNA raises red flags, beginning with its mission statement on its website, which repeats the goals of Islamism:

"Islamic Circle of North America is a leading grass roots organization which seeks to obtain the pleasure of Allah (SWT) through working for the establishment of Islam in all spheres of life."

The language restates the doctrineof a website run by Jamaat-e-Islami Hind, the Indian branch of Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), a major Islamist political party based in the countries of Pakistan and Bangladesh, as well as India and the South Asian immigrant diaspora. The JI Hind website states, "If Muslims have faith in the efficacy of Islam, which has been a potent force for the good of mankind throughout the ages, it is not only the necessary demand of their faith, but also their altruistic duty to propagate its principles, especially at a time when the country is in search of a stable basis for building the edifice of its life."

The desire to "establish" and "propagate" Islam in the public sphere by both ICNA and JI, is a clear indicator of its theocratic political intentions.

Moreover, links between the two organizations are easy to confirm. Maulana Muhammad Yusuf Islahi, sits on the central board of the Jamaat-e-Islami Hind website, and is also on the board of "Why Islam," a project of ICNA. Islahi also leads Muslims in prayer in a Why Islam produced video at the end of July 2008 called 'Why Islam Introduction.'

Why Islam also has a website that provides information to the public about Islam. Such efforts at dawah (Islamic proselytizing) are utilized by ICNA to spread its message that Islam has the answers to society's problems, as its mission statement suggests. The problem is that it also promotes anti-Semitism, misogyny and homophobia.

In summary, ICNA is a front for JI, a violent movement that advocates revolution and the erection of an Islamic order. ICNA identifies "Dawah: Inviting Mankind to Submit to the Creator" as its"top priority" and lists conversion efforts among its "expectations from all members? as follows: Spend a minimum of 4 hours a month on any of the following: Dawah to non Muslim (Dawah Field Trip, Prison dawah Trip, Dawah Response through Mail or Phone)."

The Why Islam website defends misogyny by defending polygamy, though polygamy is illegal in the United States. A quote from the website states, "What is the situation in countries that have banned polygamy? Do they really enjoy sincere and faithful 'monogamy' as the norm? Are infidelity and secret extramarital sexual relationships more moral than the legitimate, legally protected husband-wife relationships, even under polygamy if there is a pressing need for it? Which of the two situations is better?" The inference is that polygamy is preferable to society's tendency towards illicit affairs, and a way to deal with widows, etc. Islamists are not requiring Muslims to enter into polygamous marriages. Rather, what they are advocating is the right to enter into them in defiance of Western law.

Another radical text included in the welcome package is Towards Understanding Islam, penned by JI founder, Syed Abul Ala Maududi. In it, Maududi states, "The greatest sacrifice for God is made in Jihad, for in it a man sacrifices not only his own life and property in His cause but destroys those of others also."

ICNA continuously preaches armed Jihad against the West. Its publication, The Message International, includes material supporting al Qaeda and the Taliban.

This Jihad does not appear to be the inner struggle defined by spiritual Muslims and to which ICNA and its Islamist and apologist compatriots repeatedly had recourse after 9/11. Rather, the quote affirms a desire for Islamists to create a world where Muslims fight violently in the name of their interpretation of religion.

WI claims that it assists non-Muslims in learning about the 'true religion,' when in actuality, the group disseminates material advocating a totalitarian version of Islam that is not even practiced by most Muslims in the world. In attacking Jews, women, and the separation of church and state, the ICNA Welcome Package challenges the equality and respect for all non-violent religions America stands for as a democracy.

By analyzing what al-Qa'ida preaches to Muslims regarding Islam's relationship to the non-Muslim world at large, and what it states to the West are its reasons for battling it, this essay seeks to highlight the many disparities behind al-Qa'ida's words. Juxtaposed in themes, the following excerpts are all derived from Usama bin Ladin's and Ayman al-Zawahiri's writings and speeches as found in The Al Qa'ida Reader.

FULL ARTICLE

by Raymond IbrahimMiddle East Review of International Affairs December 2008

By analyzing what al-Qa'ida preaches to Muslims regarding Islam's relationship to the non-Muslim world at large, and what it states to the West are its reasons for battling it, this essay seeks to highlight the many disparities behind al-Qa'ida's words. Juxtaposed in themes, the following excerpts are all derived from Usama bin Ladin's and Ayman al-Zawahiri's writings and speeches as found in The Al Qa'ida Reader.[1]

Is al-Qa'ida waging war on the United States--issuing a fatwa to "kill the Americans and seize their money"[2] (p. 13)in retaliation to U.S. oppression, or is this animosity founded on something else? Is it mere reciprocity or is it a religion-based ideology? Talking to the West, al-Qa'ida insists it is reciprocal treatment; talking to fellow Muslims it insists that Islam demands this animosity. Consider the following discrepancies:

When addressing the United States, bin Ladin writes in response to the rhetorical question "Why we [al-Qa'ida] are fighting you," "[b]ecause you attacked us and continue to attack us." (p. 197) In fact, reciprocal treatment has been al-Qa'ida's sole justification for all the terrorist acts it has perpetrated against the West. The West attacks Muslims----for oil, Israel, land, or "Crusader" hatred----and al-Qa'ida retaliates on behalf of Muslims.

Even the September 11 strikes are rationalized as mere acts of reciprocity. After describing the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, where a massive bombing campaign leveled several high-rise apartment buildings and left thousands of Arabs dead, bin Ladin said, "[A]s I looked upon those crumbling towers in Lebanon, I was struck by the idea of punishing the oppressor in kind by destroying towers in America----giving them a taste of their own medicine and deterring them from murdering our women and children." (p. 215)

After September 11, when several more terrorist acts were committed around the world, targeting mostly Europeans, bin Ladin declared:

The events that have taken place since the attacks on Washington and New York [September 11]----such as the killing of Germans in Tunisia, the French in Karachi, the bombing of the giant French tanker in Yemen, the killing of marines in Failaka, of British and Australians in the Bali explosions, the recent operation in Moscow, and various other sporadic operations[3]--are all reactions of reciprocity, carried out by the zealous sons of Islam in defense of their faith and in response to the order of their Lord and Prophet. [p. 231]

After the bombings in Madrid, where 191 people were killed and 1460 injured, bin Ladin again addressed the Europeans:

There is a lesson [to be learned] regarding what happens in occupied Palestine and what happened on September 11 and March 11 [Madrid train bombings, killing 191 and injuring 1,460]: These are your goods returned to you. It is well understood that security is a vital necessity for all of mankind--though we do not agree that you should monopolize it for yourself. [p. 234]

After the July 2004 London bombings, Zawahiri addressed the citizens of the United Kingdom thus: "I speak to you today about the blessed raid[4] on London that... made it take a sip from the same glass from which it had long made the Muslims drink.... So taste some of what you have made us taste." (p. 238)

There is no question, then, that al-Qa'ida's defense for committing all these acts of terrorism is that it is merely, as bin Ladin puts it, returning the West's "goods"--that is, "terrorism"--back to itself. Such a defense is plausible--provided, of course, that the West is guilty of initiating the terror. Under this interpretation, al-Qa'ida gouges the West's eye since the West first gouged Islam's eye.

Moreover, this defense is ultimately rooted in the "universal" concept of justice. Most people around the world, irrespective of religion or race, understand the concept of crime and punishment. And the Torah's "eye for an eye" injunction has been the standard for many people--no doubt due to its primordial, and thus universal, sensibilities. Yet even though al-Qa'ida implies that it is acting under some sort of "universal law" that both Muslims and non-Muslims can appreciate, that is not fully true. For Muslims there is only one particular set of laws that are to be adhered to--Shari'a --and even if Shari'a contradicts something that non-Muslims consider a "universal right"--such as equality--still, Shari'a must have the final word.

When a group of Muslim scholars wrote to the Americans saying that there should be equality, justice, and freedom, between the West and Islam, bin Ladin had this to say about it:

[The Muslims' declaration] came supporting the United Nations and their humanistic articles, which revolve around three principles: equality, freedom, and justice. Nor do they mean equality, freedom, and justice as was revealed by the Prophet Muhammad [Shari'a]. No, they mean the West's despicable notions, which we see today in America and Europe, and which have made the people like cattle. [p. 26]

Islam, or "submission" to Allah, is the ultimate form of justice, the Islamists argue; everything else, depending on how far it deviates from Shari'a is oppression, injustice, and corruption. To be sure, under Shari'a, Muslims are to defend themselves against infidel aggression--to wage a "Defensive Jihad" as al-Qa'ida claims to be doing. Indeed, most of Shari'a's divine guidelines concerning jihad have to do with the legitimacy and obligation of waging Offensive Jihad, simply to gain territory and lord over infidels; how necessary is Defensive Jihad, then, when there is a need to repulse the infidel from Islamic lands?[5]

However, Shari'a has other notions--equally binding according to Islamists like those who make up its leadership--that do not comport so well with al-Qa'ida's claim that all this terrorism is simply due to Western aggression and Muslim retaliation. In other words, under Shari'a law, even if the West completely ceased all its hostilities, real or imagined, against the Islamic world, total peace would still not commence. Under Shari'a, permanent peace can only commence when the entire world either embraces or at the very least is governed by Islam.[6]

Discussing the need to overthrow those Muslim "apostate" governments that do not rule in accordance to Shari'a, bin Ladin, addressing Americans, says: "The removal of these governments is an obligation upon us, and a necessary step to free the Islamic umma [community], make Shari'a law supreme, and regain Palestine. Our fight against these governments is one with our fight against you." (p. 199)

Ayman al-Zawahiri similarly exhorts Muslims:

We also extend our hands to every Muslim zealous over making Islam triumph till they join us in a course of action to save the umma from its painful reality. [This course of action] consists of staying clear of idolatrous tyrants, warfare against infidels, loyalty to the believers, and jihadin the path of Allah. Such is a course of action that all who are vigilant for the triumph of Islam should vie in, giving and sacrificing in the cause of liberating the lands of the Muslims, making Islam supreme in its [own] land, and then spreading it around the world. [p. 113]

That last sentence--"making Islam supreme in its [own] land, and then spreading it around the world"--raises questions regarding al-Qa'ida's statements to the West, the fundamental one being: Even if all of the West's perceived or real hostilities vis-?-vis the Islamic world were to cease, would Islam then be at peace with the outside world?

Concerning this question, bin Ladin has been forthright--though only when speaking to fellow Muslims. "Moderate Islam is a Prostration to the West" (p. 17-61)--the most revealing and straightforward document produced by al-Qa'ida--puts its vision of Islam's relationship with the rest of the world in clear context.

In this essay, Muslims (in the guise of Saudi intellectuals who, in response to a letter of cooperation[7] written by Americans, responded with their own letter[8]) are chastised for even daring to want to coexist with the infidel West. Bin Ladin makes clear that the animosity between the Muslim and the infidel--which should always be "directed from the Muslim to the infidel" (p. 43)--far transcends any talk of grievances.

UNIVERSAL JUSTICE VS. SHARI'A JUSTICE

Here, the concept of "universal justice," which al-Qa'ida constantly makes appeals to in its messages to the West, is ridiculed with contempt. For example, when writing to the Europeans bin Ladin said: "I call upon just men--especially ulama [scholars], media, and businessmen--to form a permanent commission to enlighten the European peoples of the justice of our causes, particularly Palestine." (p. 235)

Yet when the Saudi intellectuals wrote, "the heart of the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims is justice, kindness, and charity--this is the equity that Allah loves and has commanded us with [p. 42]," bin Ladin was quick to clarify what true justice is:

As to the relationship between Muslims and infidels, this is summarized by the Most High's Word: "You have a good example in Abraham and those with him. They said to their people: ?We disown you and what you worship besides Allah. We renounce you. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us--till you believe in Allah alone' " [Koran 60:4]. So there is an enmity, evidenced by fierce hostility, and an internal hate from the heart. And this fierce hostility--that is, battle--ceases only if the infidel submits to the authority of Islam, or if his blood is forbidden from being shed [a dhimmi],[9] or if the Muslims are [at that point in time] weak and incapable [of spreading Shari'alaw to the world]. But if the hate at any time extinguishes from the hearts, this is great apostasy; the one who does this [extinguishes the hate from his heart] will stand excuseless before Allah. Allah Almighty's Word to His Prophet recounts in summation the true relationship: "O Prophet! Wage war against the infidels and hypocrites and be ruthless. Their abode is hell--an evil fate!" [Koran 9:73]. Such, then, is the basis and foundation of the relationship between the infidel and the Muslim. Battle, animosity, and hatred--directed from the Muslim to the infidel--is the foundation of our religion. And we consider this a justice and kindness to them. The West perceives fighting, enmity, and hatred all for the sake of the religion as unjust, hostile, and evil. But who's understanding is right--our notions of justice and righteousness, or theirs? [p. 43]

The Saudi intellectuals had tried to clarify to the West that all peoples--irrespective of religion--were entitled to justice and should never be oppressed: "Justice between people is their right, while oppression between them is forbidden--no matter what their religion, color, or nationality is" [p. 44]. When addressing and accusing the West, al-Qa'ida has relied on similar language. Writing to the Americans bin Ladin, implying that he shares universal notions of justice and injustice, sarcastically asked, "How many acts of oppression, tyranny and injustice have you carried out, O you ?callers to freedom?'" (p. 204)

As for the word "oppression," those addressed [Americans] take it to mean being placed under the authority of Islam by the sword, as the Prophet did with the infidels. They think that something that denies them [the freedom] to pursue obscenities, atheism and blasphemy, and idolatry is an "oppression." They think that an attack launched against their ground, as in an Offensive Jihad, is an "injustice." And so forth. Then come the [intellectuals] declaring that justice is a right while oppression is forbidden. If they mean justice and oppression, as understood by those addressed... then this is a great calamity, and a blasphemous conversation.... As for oppression, the only oppression is to forsake them in their infidelity, and not use jihad as a means to make them enter into the faith--as the Prophet did with them. [pp. 45-46]

UNIVERSAL COMMONALITIES VS. OFFENSIVE JIHAD

In fact, Offensive Jihad, something about which al-Qa'ida dissembles vis-?-vis the West, figures prominently in bin Ladin's diatribe to the Saudi intellectuals. In 1997, a direct question was asked of bin Ladin by a Westerner: "Mr. bin Ladin, will the end of the United States' presence in Saudi Arabia, their withdrawal, will that end your call for jihad against the United States?" Bin Ladin responded:

The cause of the reaction must be sought and the act that has triggered this reaction must be eliminated. The reaction came as a result of the U.S.' aggressive policy towards the entire Muslim world and not just towards the Arabian Peninsula. So if the cause that has called for this act comes to an end, this act, in turn, will come to an end. So, the Defensive Jihad against the U.S. does not stop with its withdrawal from the Arabian Peninsula, but rather it must desist from aggressive intervention against Muslims in the whole world.[10]

However, bin Ladin's ultimate motives became apparent after the Saudi intellectuals wrote: "Thus we say in all earnestness and plainly that we can open a mature dialogue around every issue that the West submits, ever cognizant that we share a number of understandings, moral values, rights, and ideas with the West, which, if fostered, can create a better [world] for all concerned" (p. 37)

To this "blasphemy," bin Ladin wrote extensively:

Regarding which shared understandings, exactly, is it possible that we agree with the immoral West?... What commonalities, if our foundations contradict, rendering useless the shared extremities--if they even exist? For practically everything valued by the immoral West is condemned under sharia law.... [T]he issues most prominent in the West revolve around secularism, homosexuality, sexuality, and atheism [p. 37].... As for this atmosphere of shared understandings, what evidence is there for Muslims to strive for this? What did the Prophet, the Companions after him, and the righteous forebears do? Did they wage jihadagainst the infidels, attacking them all over the earth, in order to place them under the suzerainty of Islam in great humility and submission? Or did they send messages to discover "shared understandings" between themselves and the infidels in order that they may reach an understanding whereby universal peace, security, and natural relations would spread--in such a satanic manner as this? The sharia provides a true and just path, securing Muslims, and providing peace to the world [p. 31].

Moreover, when the Saudi intellectuals dared write: "It's imperative that we bid all to legitimate talks, presented to the world, under the umbrella of justice, morality, and rights, ushering in legislations creating peace and prosperity for the world," [p. 31] bin Ladin lamented:

Surely there is no power save through Allah alone! We never thought that such words would ever appear from those who consider themselves adherents of this religion. Such expressions, and more like them, would lead the reader to believe that those who wrote them are Western intellectuals, not Muslims! Those previous expressions are true only by tearing down the wall of enmity from the infidels. They are also expressions true only by rejecting jihad--especially Offensive Jihad. The problem, however, is that Offensive Jihadis an established and basic tenet of this religion. It is a religious duty rejected only by the most deluded. So how can they call off this religious obligation [Offensive Jihad], while imploring the West to understandings and talks "under the umbrella of justice, morality, and rights"? The essence of all this comes from right inside the halls of the United Nations, instead of the Divine foundations that are built upon hating the infidels, repudiating them with tongue and teeth till they embrace Islam or pay the jizya [tribute] with willing submission and humility.... Muslims, and especially the learned among them, should spread sharia law to the world--that and nothing else. Not laws under the "umbrella of justice, morality, and rights" as understood by the masses. No, the sharia of Islam is the foundation. [pp. 32-33]

FREEDOM VS. TERRORISM

Al-Qa'ida has maintained that its hostilities to the West have absolutely nothing to do with the latter's freedoms. Speaking to the Americans, bin Ladin asserted, "From the start, I tell you that security is an indispensable pillar of human life; free men do not underestimate their security--contrary to [President George W.] Bush's claim that we hate freedom. [11] If so, let him explain to us why we have not attacked Sweden, for instance." [p. 214].

Speaking to the Europeans, bin Ladin tries to define terrorism: "[W]e inform you that your description of us as ?terrorists' and our actions as ?terrorism' necessarily means that you and your actions must be defined likewise. Our actions are merely reactions to yours...." (p. 234)

Finally, bin Ladin makes it quite clear that terrorism is used only in reciprocity since al-Qa'ida has no other choice: "Shall a man be blamed for protecting his own? Self-defense and punishing the wicked in kind--are these shameful [acts of] ?terrorism'? And even if it is, we have no other option." (p. 216)

Taken together, all these messages assert that the terror al-Qa'ida inflicts upon the West has nothing to do with Western freedoms and everything to do with reciprocal treatment. Moreover, by stating "we have no other option" than to engage in acts of terrorism, bin Ladin clearly implies that terrorism is being relied upon as a last resort out of desperation. Thus al-Qa'ida maintains that there is no correlation between Western freedoms and Islamic terrorism--that the latter is never used simply to suppress the former.

This is not the case when addressing the Saudis. After they wrote to the Americans saying that Islam does not allow coercion in matters of religion, bin Ladin, once again, revealed his true beliefs and ultimate goals. The Saudi intellectuals had declared, "It is not permitted to coerce anyone regarding his religion. Allah Most High said: ?There is no compulsion in religion' [Koran 2:256]. Thus Islam itself does not comport with coercion." (p. 40) After explaining that this verse has to do with matters of the heart and not Islam's destiny to rule the whole world,[12] bin Ladin quotes the Hadith:

Whenever the Messenger of Allah appointed someone as leader of an army or detachment, he would especially exhort him to fear Allah and be good to the Muslims with him. Then he would say: "Attack in the name of Allah and in the path of Allah do battle with whoever rejects Allah. Attack!... If you happen upon your idolatrous enemies, call them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, accept it and stay yourself from them. [1] Call them to Islam: If they respond [i.e., convert], accept this and cease fighting them..... [2] If they refuse to accept Islam, demand of them the jizya: If they respond, accept it and cease fighting them. [3] But if they refuse, seek the aid of Allah and fight them." Thus our talks with the infidel West and our conflict with them ultimately revolve around one issue--one that demands our total support, with power and determination, with one voice--and it is: Does Islam, or does it not, force people by the power of the sword to submit to its authority corporeally if not spiritually? Yes. There are only three choices in Islam: either willing submission; or payment of the jizya, through physical though not spiritual, submission to the authority of Islam; or the sword--for it is not right to let him [an infidel] live. The matter is summed up for every person alive: Either submit, or live under the suzerainty of Islam, or die. [pp. 41-42]

When the Saudi intellectuals wrote: "Man, from his very make-up, is a sacred creation. Thus it is impermissible to transgress against him, no matter what his color, race, or religion." Bin Ladin, after mocking their language for its "UN" tone, wrote extensively:

Now, then, how can you speak about Allah without knowledge? Who told you that transgression against man is impermissible--if he is an infidel? What about Offensive Jihad? Allah Exalted, the Most High, said: "Fight them! Allah will torment them with your hands".... [Koran 9:14] Indeed, these expressions of yours are built upon the principle of equality, as found in the charters of the United Nations, which do not distinguish [among] people, neither by way of religion nor race nor sex. Islam improves; it is not improved.... [p. 38] Furthermore, how can they [intellectuals] claim that we have no right to force a people to change its particular values, when they transgress the bounds of nature? Such are lies. In fact, Muslims are obligated to raid the lands of the infidels, occupy them, and exchange their systems of governance for an Islamic system, barring any practice that contradicts the sharia from being publicly voiced among the people, as was the case at the dawn of Islam....[p. 50] Thus they make claims and speak about Allah without understanding. They say that our sharia does not impose our particular beliefs upon others; this is a false assertion. For it is, in fact, part of our religion to impose our particular beliefs upon others. Whoever doubts this, let him turn to the deeds of the Companions when they raided the lands of the Christians and Omar imposed upon them the conditions of dhimmi[tude]. These conditions involve clothing attire, specific situations, and class distinctions known to ulamaas the pact of Omar,[13] and they are notoriously famous. Let the signatories review them so they know that we are to force people by the power of the sword to [our] particular understandings, customs, and conditions, all in order to induce debasement and humility, just like Allah commanded when he said: "[...]until they pay the jizya by hand, in complete submission and humility." [Koran 9:29] Now, if you are incapable of jihad and placing people into the religion, like the Companions did, your impotence does not mean that it is not a legitimate aspect of the religion. [p. 51]

As for direct support for terrorism, bin Ladin again refers to the Koran:

"Muster against them [infidels] what fighting-men and steeds of war you can, in order to strike terror in the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides them whom you do not know, but Allah knows well." [Koran 8:60] Thus whoever refuses the principle of terror[ism] against the enemy also refuses the commandment of Allah the Exalted, the Most High, and His sharia. The West prepares to defend itself in face of this extremist verse. [p. 54]

The Saudi intellectuals wrote: "Terrorism, according to the universally agreed meaning being used today, is but one of many manifestations of unjust aggression against life and property." Bin Ladin, outraged, responds:

Behold! Today they are agreed to the meaning and definition of "terrorism" as acknowledged and agreed to by the Americans, that is, "unjust aggression against life and property." And such acknowledgment by necessity must apply to and include the Prophet who assaulted the lives, properties, and women of the infidels, who were living in secure and settled cities. As did his Companions after him. Such aggression, as understood by the West, is not justified; nor does such hostility agree with the Western notion of "freedom of religion." Thus our Prophet and his Companions and the righteous forefathers have all now become "terrorists."[14] [p. 58]

Taken together, the above three sections all demonstrate that for al-Qa'ida, hostility and violence towards the West is not merely "reciprocal treatment"--that is, "an eye for an eye"--but rather religious obligation that far transcends any and all notions of "universal justice" and claims to grievances. However, there are two more notable contradictions between what they say to the West and what they affirm to Muslims. Consider the following disparities:

TRUCE VS. TAQIYYA

On two separate occasions, al-Qa'ida, in the person of bin Ladin, has offered the West a truce. In April of 2002, bin Ladin offered European nations an apparently long-lasting truce: "I therefore offer them this peace treaty [mudabarat sulh], which essentially is a commitment to cease operations against every country that pledges not to attack Muslims or interfere in their business--including the American conspiracy against the greater Islamic world.... Stop shedding our blood and thereby save your own." [p. 235]

In late January 2006, bin Ladin, who had not been heard from for over a year, resurfaced by way of an audio-tape and offered the Americans a truce: "So we have no qualms in offering you a long-term truce on fair conditions that we adhere to. For we are the umma that Allah has forbidden from double-crossing and lying." [p. 224]

However, while Islam does permit the making of truces with infidels, it only allows this under certain conditions--namely, when Muslims are in a weakened position and unable to wage an Offensive Jihad effectively.[15] In "Jihad, Martyrdom, and the Killing of Innocents," Ayman Zawahiri declares:

Whenever they are able... believers are to enjoin good and forbid evil [i.e. enforce Shari'a law]--which, by nature, is [waging Offensive] Jihad in the path of Allah and spreading the call to [conversion to the religion of] the Most High: "Those whom we have given mastery over the earth uphold prayers, render alms, enjoin good and forbid evil; Allah controls the destiny of all things" [Koran 22:41].... Therefore if believers are weak, they are to wage jihad with their hearts and tongues; if they are able, they are to enjoin what is good and forbid what is evil, fight the infidels, and spread the call of Tawhid. [pp. 150-51]

In this same treatise, Zawahiri stresses the need for deception in warfare. Based on Muhammad's assertion--"War [is] deceit"--Zawahiri goes on to say:

Deception in warfare requires that the mujahid bide his time and wait for an opportunity against his enemy, while avoiding confrontation at all possible costs. For triumph, in almost every case, is [achieved] through deception: triumph achieved through confrontation possesses many dangers.... And in the Hadith, practicing deceit in war is well demonstrated. Indeed, its need is more stressed than [the need for] courage. [p. 142]

More importantly, however, in Ayman al-Zawahiri's treatise "Loyalty and Enmity," Muslims are flat-out told that lying and dissembling in front of infidels is permitted. This is the doctrine of taqiyya (religiously sanctioned lies for purposes of self-preservation),[16] which has plenty of Koranic but especially Hadith support. The Koran states: "Let Believers not take for friends and allies infidels rather than Believers: and who so does this shall have no relationship left with Allah--unless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precautions." (Koran 3:28) Two of the more famous Hadiths evoked by al-Qa'ida say, "Truly, we grin to the faces of some peoples, while our hearts curse them"; and "Protection is not secured by deeds but with the tongue." (p. 73)

Finally, there are also several Hadiths of Muhammad that justify oath-breaking. For instance, "Allah's Messenger [Muhammad] said, ?He who takes an oath but eventually finds a better way should do that which is better and break his oath.'" (Sahih Muslim 15: 4057)

Considering that al-Qa'ida subscribes to the view that Islam must war with the non-Muslim world till the former subsumes the latter, and that they also subscribe to these doctrines of deceit, what is to be made of al-Qa'ida's truce-offers?

WHY THE WEST IS HOSTILE TO ISLAM

As aforementioned, in their messages to the West, al-Qa'ida maintains that the former is unjust towards Islam for a plethora of reasons--Israeli interests, oil, land, and Crusader hatred being prominent among them. A quick perusal of The Al Qaeda Reader's "Propaganda" section will clearly confirm this. Even in most of their messages to Muslims, al-Qa'ida is quick to stress these reasons in order to incite Muslims, gain their sympathy, and grow in recruits. However, in "Moderate Islam is a Prostration to the West," bin Ladin changes his tune. He repeatedly states that the West is ultimately hostile to Islam because it knows that Islam is hostile to it--that "the West avenges itself against Islam for giving infidels but three options: Islam, jizya, or the sword." (p. 42)

The West is hostile to us on account of Loyalty and Enmity, and [Offensive] Jihad.... What the West desires is that we abandon [the doctrine of] Loyalty and Enmity, and abandon [Offensive] Jihad. This is the very essence of their request and desire of us. Do the intellectuals, then, think it's actually possible for Muslims to abandon these two commandments simply to coexist with the West? [p. 30] In fact, the West did not treat Islam in this atrocious manner until after it [first] understood the truth about Islam--comprehended its essence and soul. And the West is knowledgeable of all religions, but it would never confront any of them, nor persecute their people. But it is bent on pulverizing the Muslims, since first learning of their enterprise [Offensive Jihad and the "three choices"]. [p. 55]

RECIPROCITY OR RELIGION?

All of the above clearly demonstrates that, for al-Qa'ida, the war with the West is not finite but eternal. The current battles may ostensibly revolve around U.S. presence in Islamic lands, or support for Israel, or support for secular though dictatorial regimes, or even oil. Even so, the ultimate war does not end with a cessation of these real or perceived injustices, but rather with the West's--indeed, the rest of the non-Islamic world's--submission to Islam. As the words of Usama bin Ladin and Ayman al-Zawahiri--all grounded in the traditional sources of Islam--make clear, the war with the West revolves around something more transcendent than temporal grievances. It revolves around "eternal truths."

How, then, should al-Qa'ida's messages to the West--wholly crafted to vindicate al-Qa'ida, weaken Western resolve, and incite the umma--be taken? Should one conclude that all those grievances that al-Qa'ida cite are wholly unfounded? Not necessarily. In fact, it is precisely because the vast majority of the world's 1.2 billion Muslims, not to mention a considerable number of non-Muslims, believe these grievances to be true that al-Qa'ida enjoys the apparent widespread--sympathetic if not actual--support that they receive.[17]

All that said, Westerners should also be cognizant of what al-Qa'ida and like-minded Islamists ultimately want as the former consider the long list of alleged wrongs the Islamic world has suffered at the hands of the West. In other words, if al-Qa'ida's arguably "just" demands are met--if the United States evacuates Iraq and Afghanistan, if the West keeps its nose out of the Islamic world's affairs, even if Israel were to disappear--would all that be enough to satisfy al-Qa'ida and their supporters? Certainly, it would be a start. Yet based on their words and convictions that all injunctions of the Koran must be fulfilled, it is clear that, when the time is ripe, the jihad would merely shift from being Defensive to being Offensive--the latter being the true and historic manifestation of jihad.[18]

Nor should Westerners believe that al-Qa'ida is the root of the problem. The "problem" between the West--in fact, the world--and Islam is the "radical" version of the latter articulated by al-Qa'ida but also other Islamists--past, present, and no doubt future. This is even historically demonstrable: When Hasan al-Bana and Sayyid Qutb (respectively, founder and ideologue of Egypt's famous Muslim Brotherhood) were assassinated, that organization did not fall apart but continued thriving underground for decades until to international dismay it won a fair number of seats in Egypt's recent elections; the Iranian Islamic Revolution did not die with its spiritual leader, the Ayatollah Khomeini, but is as strong now as it was then--with the exception that its nuclear aspirations are nearly realized; after the spiritual leader of Hamas, Ahmad Yassin was assassinated, far from losing influence, Hamas won the majority of house seats in Palestine's recent elections. Ayman al-Zawahiri summarizes this phenomenon well:

Jihad in the path of Allah is greater than any individual or organization. It is a struggle between Truth and Falsehood, until Allah Almighty inherits the earth and those who live in it. Mullah Muhammad Omar and Sheikh Osama bin Ladin--may Allah protect them from all evil--are merely two soldiers of Islam in the journey of jihad, while the struggle between Truth and Falsehood transcends time. [p. 182]

The bottom line is, perceived Western injustices--as propagated by bin Ladin's mantras--have nothing to do with the ultimate source of hostilities between Islam and the West (Infidelity). The doctrine of Offensive Jihad, spreading the laws of Allah to every corner of the world by the sword and enforcing the practice of dhimmitude (that is, discriminating and humiliating those who, having been conquered and living under Islamic suzerainty, still do not embrace Islam officially), was and remains a basic tenant of Islam--well before it ever encountered the West:

Fight those amongst the People of the Book [Christians and Jews] who do not believe in Allah nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden [i.e. enforce Shari'a law], and who do not embrace the religion of truth [Islam], until they pay the Jizya with willing submissiveness and feel themselves utterly subdued. [Koran 9:29]

The word "until" (hata) highlights the perpetual nature of this command. Enmity for non-Muslims, irrespective of whether or not they harm the Muslim is also a basic tenant of the faith, established before Islam and the West met:

"O you who have believed! Do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are but friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them [i.e., he apostasies from Islam]." [Koran 5:51]

You have a good example in Abraham and those who followed him, for they said to their people, "We disown you and the idols which you worship besides Allah. We renounce you: enmity and hate shall reign between us until you believe in Allah alone." [Koran 60:4]

It is important to keep in mind that these verses have nothing to do with reciprocity; instead they express the standard relationship between Muslims and infidels--even when the latter do not interfere in Muslims' affairs, militarily, economically, politically, or culturally, and completely mind their own business. Moreover, such hostility is perceived as altruistic, as bin Ladin concludes: "As for oppression, the only oppression is to forsake them in their unbelief, and not launch an [Offensive] Jihad against them till they submit to the faith--as the Prophet did with them." (p. 46)

At this point many will proclaim that al-Qa'ida is misusing, misinterpreting, or taking these otherwise straightforward verses out of context. That is hardly the point here: Even if this were true, that does not change the fact that many men before al-Qa'ida, going back to the first jihads of the seventh century, have also "misused" them, or that many today who have nothing to do with al-Qa'ida, "misinterpret them," or ultimately that many after al-Qa'ida will also be taking them "out of context." In other words, even if those verses really do not mean what they seem to be saying, they certainly led themselves to the sort of hostile interpretation that al-Qa'ida and other Islamists, past, present and future, give to them. This is all the more troubling since it took only 19 men who follow such "interpretations" to cause September 11.

Irrespective of real or imagined Western injustices, the real question of permanent peace revolves around the above Islamic doctrines. In this sense, then, real peace ultimately depends on Islam and how it defines itself: Either Islam will dominate the whole world fulfilling its destiny, or else Muslims themselves will reject the doctrines of jihad, dhimmitude, and general enmity for non-Muslims. The problem, however, is that even if all these divisive doctrines are formally repudiated--will that be merely a show of taqiyya, a stratagem of war?

Based purely on al-Qa'ida's, that is, radical Islam's, worldview, it is readily apparent that the West is given no choice but to fight--to gain the upper-hand and strive to keep it, even at the risk of being oppressive. What good are al-Qa'idist appeals to justice in face of its belief that every person has but three choices (convert to Islam, live the life of a dhimmi, or die)? What good is it telling the West that they have "choices" in face of an immutable Shari'a? What good is a truce in face of doctrines of deception?

This is unfortunate for Muslims, and in this sense al-Qa'ida's "version" of Islam brings them more harm then good. If Islam is perceived as being intrinsically hostile to the infidel world at large--as al-Qa'ida and many other Muslim insist--all of the possibly legitimate grievances that many Muslims believe they are suffering become moot, since the West is doing what it must to stay dominant against a potentially hostile force. Thus even if Muslims are being oppressed, as long as these grievances are being articulated through an Islamic paradigm that perceives justice solely through Shari'a and not through anything universal or innate to the human condition, the West--in the interest of self-preservation as well as the preservation of freedoms--has no choice but to reject all accusations, offers, and threats from Islamists, and fight.

Indeed, according to this worldview, upheld by al-Qa'ida, where the Abode of Peace (Islam) and the Abode of War (the rest) are forever in a struggle of life and death, the West can hardly be blamed for behaving oppressively, if in fact it does, towards the Islamic world. In this context, such oppression can be understood as a sort of "preemptive" reciprocal treatment, as the argument can be made that if the West does not keep Islam suppressed, Islam will suppress it. A survival of the fittest mentality--"get them before they get us"--is the only mentality that can withstand radical Islam, as so well represented by al-Qa'ida.

In fact, bin Ladin's many statements of reciprocity work both ways: "Shall a man be blamed for protecting his own?" "The road to safety begins by eliminating the aggression." "Reciprocal treatment is part of justice." "He who initiates aggression is the unjust one." "We believe that this right to defend oneself is the right of all human beings."[19] "We want to defend our people and our land. That is why I say that if we don't get security, the Americans, too would not get security.

This is a simple formula that even an American child can understand. This is the formula of live and let live."[20] Ironically, every single one of these statements actually justifies Western aggression against radical Islam.

Thus, the West is damned if it does, damned if it doesn't. If the West voluntarily concedes to the demands and grievances of al-Qa'ida, it will be perceived as a weakness or an admission of defeat, and will eventually only encourage an Offensive Jihad, when the time is right. If the West actually loses the current war, that too will provoke an offensive response, one seen as the natural next stage in the struggle toward the total victory of Islam. This is an important reminder to those many who, while condemning al-Qa'ida's methods, agree or sympathize with their grievances. The current battle at hand may ostensibly revolve around those grievances; but the forthcoming war will ultimately be about militarily establishing Islamic supremacy over the entire globe.

Some will discount this possibility as implausible since it seems so distant; but the wild vicissitudes of history are constantly proving otherwise.

Raymond Ibrahim is Associate Director of the Middle East Forum. He writes regularly about radical Islamism and is the author of The Al Qaeda Reader (Broadway, 2007), translations of religious texts and propaganda.

NOTES

[1] Though they are representative of the entire book, many of the more revealing remarks come from "Moderate Islam is a Prostration to the West," where Saudi bin Ladin, writing to fellow Saudis and "pouring out his heart," unrestrainedly discusses many topics related to Islam that are otherwise taboo, especially here in the West.[2] Raymond Ibrahim, The Al Qaeda Reader (New York: Broadway, 2007). Excerpts from the book are followed by the page number in the text.[3]Germans in Tunisia: On April 11, 2002, a 24-year-old Tunisian man, who is suspected of spending some time in Afghanistan between 2000 and 2001, carried out a suicide operation in the Tunisian island and popular tourist destination Djerba: Fourteen German tourists, one Frenchman, and six Tunisians were killed, and 30 were wounded. French in Karachi: On May 8, 2002, a suicide bomber detonated a car bomb alongside a crowded bus in Karachi, killing 11 Frenchmen and two Pakistanis. Fifty others were wounded. French tanker in Yemen: On October 6, 2002, the Limburg, a French oil tanker carrying 397,000 gallons of crude oil stationed in the Gulf of Amen off the Yemeni coast, was rammed by an explosive-laden boat. One Bulgarian crewman died, 12 were injured, and nearly 100,000 barrels of oil leaked out. Marines in Failaka: On October 8, 2002, while U.S. marines were conducting war games on the Kuwaiti island of Failaka, two Kuwaiti nationals walked up to the troops and opened fire, killing one American and wounding two. British and Australians in Bali: On October 12, 2002, three bombs were detonated in the town of Kuta on the Indonesian island of Bali, killing 202 people and injuring a further 209. It is considered the deadliest act of terrorism in Indonesian history. The majority of the dead were foreign tourists, including some 88 Australians, 26 British, and 38 Indonesians. Operation in Moscow: On October 23, 2002, 40 armed Chechen rebels seized a crowded Moscow theater, taking over 700 hostages and demanding the withdrawal of Russian forces from Chechnya. After a siege of two and a half days, Russian special forces stormed the building after firing in some sort of anesthetic gas. All of the Chechen rebels were killed, along with 130 of the hostages.[4] The "blessed raid" on London occurred on July 7, 2005, during rush hour and consisted of a series of coordinated suicide bombings that struck the city's public transport system. The bombings killed 52 civilians and injured over 700.[5] As far as the thirteenth century jurist Ibn Taymiyya--known as the Shaykh of Islam--is concerned, Defensive Jihad is second only after belief itself. Al-Qa'ida often quotes the following passage from Taymiyya's fatwas to demonstrate the obligation for Muslims to join the Defensive Jihad against the United States and its allies: "Defensive warfare is the most critical form of warfare, [since we are] warding off an invader from [our] sanctities and religion. It is a unanimously accepted duty. After belief, there is no greater duty than to repulse the invading enemy who corrupts faith and the world. There are no rules or conditions for this; he must be expelled by all possible means. Our learned ulama and others have all agreed to this. It is imperative to distinguish between repulsing the invading, oppressive infidel [Defensive Jihad] and pursuing him in his own lands [Offensive Jihad]."[6] This is the standard view adopted by, for instance, the Four Schools (madhahbs) of Sunni jurisprudence, and is attested by many standard works of Islamic law. For example, the Encyclopedia of Islam's entry on jihad simply states, "The duty of the djihad exists as long as the universal domination of Islam has not been attained."[7]http://www.americanvalues.org/html/what_we_re_fighting_for.html.[8]http://www.americanvalues.org/html/saudi_statement.html.[9] Non-Muslims, Jews and Christians, who are "protected" in exchange for sociopolitical submission and the payment of special taxes.[10]http://www.anusha.com/osamaint.htm[11] In several public addresses, the American president has often referred to al-Qa'ida and its affiliates as "enemies of freedom" and "people who hate freedom." In his address to a joint session of Congress and the American people delivered nine days after the September 11 attacks, the president remarked, "Americans are asking, why do they [perpetrators of September 11] hate us? They hate what we see right here in this chamber--a democratically elected government. Their leaders are self-appointed. They hate our freedoms--our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other."[12] Bin Ladin's position towards this verse is simply that, either it has been abrogated by the "sword verse" (Koran 9:5)--which, in fact, most ulama agree has abrogated some 120 Meccan (peaceful) verses--or else that it has nothing to do with Islam's command to rule the world, but rather deals with freedom of conscience.[13] The "pact of Umar" is the treaty that was made between the People of the Book and the second Caliph, Umar. In order to continue practicing their faiths, Christians and Jews had to agree to several social conditions enumerated in the pact that, among other things, were meant to induce humiliation and debasement in accordance with the verse cited (Koran 9:29). For instance, they were to rise from their seats if a Muslim wanted it; they were forbidden from riding on saddles or bearing any arms; they were forbidden from publicly showing their crosses or worshipping too loudly, lest Muslim eyes or ears be offended; they were forbidden from building new churches, or even repairing old ones. Some apologists maintain that these conditions were not strictly enforced at all times. However, what is important here is that "dhimmitude," like bin Ladin asserts, is in fact a basic tenant of Islam and thus should be enforced under Shari'a law.[14] In fact, Shaykh Abdallah Azzam (1941-1989), the highly influential Islamic scholar, mujahid, and bin Ladin's onetime mentor and hero, often boastfully referred to Muhammad as, not only a terrorist, but the first terrorist: "We are terrorists. Every Muslim must be a terrorist. Terrorism is an obligation as demonstrated in the Koran and Sunna. Allah Most High said: ?Muster against them [infidels] all the men and cavalry at your command, so that you may strike terror into the heart of your enemy and Allah's enemy' [Koran 8:60]. Thus terrorism is a [religious] obligation. And the Messenger of Allah is the first terrorist and the first menace" (al-Hijra wa al-I?dad). Some have accused bin Ladin of falling out and assassinating Azzam in order to assume control of the then nascent base ("al-Qa'ida").[15] Most jurists are agreed that, theoretically, ten years is the maximum amount of time for peace between Islam and infidels, based on Muhammad's treaty of Hudaybiyya. According to the Encyclopedia of Islam, "Peace with non-Muslim nations is, therefore, a provisional state of affairs only; the chance of circumstances alone can justify it temporarily. Furthermore there can be no question of genuine peace treaties with these nations; only truces, whose duration ought not, in principle, to exceed ten years, are authorized. But even such truces are precarious, inasmuch as they can, before they expire, be repudiated unilaterally should it appear more profitable for Islam to resume the conflict."[16] For more on the topic of taqiyya, see Raymond Ibrahim, "Islam's Doctrines of Deception," Jane's Islamic Affairs Analyst, September 26, 2008.[17] That a bounty combined to amount nearly 100 million dollars placed on bin Ladin and Zawahiri's heads has not been collected in one of the most impoverished regions in the world is telling enough.[18] All the original Islamic texts, from Hadiths to books on Islamic law, that discuss the term "jihad," explain it as war to simply spread Islamic authority. It was only after the Crusades and Mongol invasions that the ulama began delineating the concept of "defensive" jihad which, according to premiere jurists such as Ibn Taymiyya, is second only to faith, and obligatory on the entire Muslim umma, as opposed to offensive jihad, which is deemed a "communal duty," or fard kifiya.[19]http://www.robert-fisk.com/usama_interview_aljazeera.htm.[20]http://www.dawn.com/2001/11/10/top1.htm.

On October 14, Canadian voters handed Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper his second minority government, one even stronger than his first. Harper vows to maintain the nation's military commitment in Afghanistan through 2011, but his dedication to fighting radical Islam at home remains unclear.

FULL ARTICLE

by Kathy ShaidlePajamas Media December 1, 2008

Source: http://www.meforum.org/2019/canada-vs-radical-islam

On October 14, Canadian voters handed Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper his second minority government, one even stronger than his first. Harper vows to maintain the nation's military commitment in Afghanistan through 2011, but his dedication to fighting radical Islam at home remains unclear.

Ezra Levant was one of those trying to keep those issues on the table while working the party's "war room" during the campaign. Levant famously reprinted the Danish cartoons of Mohammed in his magazine, the Western Standard, back in 2006, an act that got him hauled before the Alberta Human Rights Commission for "Islamophobia." That was Canada's first real taste of Islamist "lawfare" tactics, and its most notorious next to similar charges brought against Maclean's magazine and its columnist Mark Steyn.

Levant is optimistic about the prime minister's commitment to fighting radical Islam on the domestic front.

"You might recall," Levant told Islamist Watch right after the election, "that the 18 young Muslims arrested for plotting to blow up the CBC and CN Tower and behead the prime minister happened right after Harper was first elected. His response was not the typical politically correct response of having a photo-op with a radical imam."

Rather, the Harper government refused to meet with, and thereby legitimize, radical groups like the Canadian Islamic Congress. Instead, the Conservatives pointedly visited Ahmaddiya and Ismaili Muslim communities, which tend to be more "educated, professional, charitable, liberal."

According to one expert, however, the Harper government still has work to do on the anti-Islamist front.

David B. Harris directs the International and Terrorist Intelligence Program for INSIGNIS Strategic Research. He outlined the challenges facing the new government in the months ahead.

When radical Muslims succeed in "mainstreaming the victimization narrative," this makes "the mainstream, including courts, vulnerable to demands for the most excessive of accommodations, accommodations that tend to reinforce any self-isolating, anti-integrationist inclinations ? and the creation and existence of potentially dangerous parallel societies."

Harris also calls on the Conservative government to ensure that radical Muslim groups "are never engaged in ?outreach' activity by police and security organizations."

The hot-button issue of immigration is, next to socialized medicine, the most "untouchable" in Canada. Citizens imbibe the civic religion of "multiculturalism, tolerance, and diversity" beginning in elementary school. In spite of that, Harris is blunt.

"Immigration must be brought under immediate control," he told Islamist Watch, "and no longer be viewed as a mere vote-importing mechanism" ? the strategy the Liberal Party employed for generations to become, until recently, "the natural ruling party."

Harris adds, "Bringing over a quarter of a million people a year into Canada is unconscionable in this threat environment, and it should be no surprise that our few thousand security officials are overworked."

Whether or not Stephen Harper really has the mandate, let alone the fortitude, to address creeping Sharia, domestic radicalism, and Islamic lawfare remains to be seen. Like all politicians, Harper is interested primarily in getting reelected and eventually winning a majority government for his Conservative Party. This means not alienating Muslim voters or moderate liberals. Harper's personal style, which is low key in the extreme, is intended to convey steadiness but often comes across as indifference. This in turn frustrates Canadians concerned about lawfare and creeping Sharia. (Ironically, the Canadians most vocal about those concerns tend to be Quebeckers ? who historically vote Liberal and once again rejected Harper's attempts to court them during this election.)

Muslims currently make up approximately two percent of the Canadian population, and the number who could be described as "radical" is far less. However, the radical few are able to generate considerable media attention. While their attempts to effectively "hijack" two magazines through the Canadian Human Rights Commissions ultimately proved unsuccessful, those cases had a chilling effect on journalists and moderate Muslims.

Not all moderate Muslims, however. Three of them recently met at a Quebec conference to discuss radical Islam and its infiltration of Canadian political parties, particularly the country's number three party, the socialist New Democrats (NDP).

Author Tarek Fatah declared that he'd switched party affiliation from NDP to Liberal because, "in the last NDP leadership campaign, I was witness to an attempt by a group of wealthy Islamists to back one member of Parliament for the leadership, with the stated objective of controlling the party."

While the NDP could never conceivably form a minority government, let alone a majority one, it is a highly vocal part of the official opposition, represents many of the nation's most multicultural, urban ridings, and can make or break any anti-Islamist efforts the Conservatives may table in Parliament.

Add to that recent hints by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (the country's version of the FCC) that it hopes to start regulating the internet ? the key medium for fighting Islamist ideas ? and the future looks less encouraging all the time.

Ultimately, Canada's fight against domestic Islamism is in the hands of dedicated, informed individuals, regardless of who happens to currently reside at 24 Sussex Drive.

Kathy Shaidle's new book isThe Tyranny of Nice: How Canada crushes freedom in the name of human rights ? and why it matters to Americans.

Since their electoral landslide victory in November 2002, Islamists within Turkey's Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalk?nma Partisi, AKP) have camouflaged themselves as "democratic Islamic conservatives."[1]

The AKP claims to be the Muslim equivalent of the Christian-Democratic parties of Western Europe. Such an analogy is false, however. What the AKP seeks is not "Islam without fear," to borrow the phrase of Trinity College professor Raymond Baker,[2] but rather a strategy for a creeping Islamization that culminates in a Shari?a (Islamic law) state not compatible with a secular, democratic order. The AKP does not advertise this agenda and often denies it. This did not convince the chief prosecutor of Turkey who, because of AKP efforts to Islamize Turkey, sought to ban the party and seventy-one of its leaders. While the AKP survived a ban, the majority of justices found that the AKP had worked to advance an Islamist agenda and undermine secularism.[3] Nevertheless, the AKP enjoys the backing of the United States and the European Union as well. Through its support for institutional Islamism in Turkey, the West loses its true friends: liberal Muslims.

FULL ARTICLE

by Bassam TibiMiddle East Quarterly Winter 2009, pp. 47-54

Source: http://www.meforum.org/2047/islamists-approach-europe

Since their electoral landslide victory in November 2002, Islamists within Turkey's Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalk?nma Partisi, AKP) have camouflaged themselves as "democratic Islamic conservatives."[1] The AKP claims to be the Muslim equivalent of the Christian-Democratic parties of Western Europe. Such an analogy is false, however. What the AKP seeks is not "Islam without fear," to borrow the phrase of Trinity College professor Raymond Baker,[2] but rather a strategy for a creeping Islamization that culminates in a Shari?a (Islamic law) state not compatible with a secular, democratic order. The AKP does not advertise this agenda and often denies it. This did not convince the chief prosecutor of Turkey who, because of AKP efforts to Islamize Turkey, sought to ban the party and seventy-one of its leaders. While the AKP survived a ban, the majority of justices found that the AKP had worked to advance an Islamist agenda and undermine secularism.[3] Nevertheless, the AKP enjoys the backing of the United States and the European Union as well. Through its support for institutional Islamism in Turkey, the West loses its true friends: liberal Muslims.

Advance of Secularism

Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdo?an (L), Javier Solana, European Union high representative, and Jos? Zapatero (R), Spanish prime minister, meet at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Riga Summit, November 29, 2006. A problem for both Turkey's entry into the European Union and the Turkish diaspora in Europe is how to encourage the Turkish diaspora's Europeanization. If Turkey were to become a secular, European-style democracy, it would face no obstacles to European Union accession.

The processes of secularization predate the Kemalist revolution and trace back to the Tanzimat reforms, which Ottoman sultans began in the mid-nineteenth century. However, it was the Kemalist revolution that established real secularism in Turkey. Today, Turkey is the only one of fifty-seven majority Muslim states in which secularism is constitutionally enshrined. After establishing the republic, Mustafa Kemal Atat?rk abolished the caliphate, Shari?a courts, and other aspects of the Islamic legal system and religious order. The problem remains, however, that while the state is secular in terms of its full adoption of the Swiss legal code, such secularism does not extend to civil society, at least in terms of "open society."[4]

Constitutionally, Turkey is a secular state but, in reality, both Turkish civil society and its institutions are weak. In this sense, Turkey does not meet the democratic standards prevailing in the member states of the European Union. Turkish law guarantees neither freedom of religion nor freedom of speech. In 2005, Turkish authorities sought to prosecute prominent Turkish writer Orhan Pamuk for his remarks regarding the World War I-era deaths of Armenians.[5] The AKP has legislated a variety of reforms, but these remain more cosmetic than real.[6] ?erif Mardin, a political science professor at Sabanc? University who is sympathetic to the AKP, argues that "Civil society is a Western dream ? [It] does not translate into Islamic terms."[7]

Still, Turkey is democratic. Despite coups in 1960, 1971, and 1980, Turkey has had thirteen competitive, national elections in the past half-century and more than twenty changes of ruling party. Next to Mali and Senegal, Freedom House ranks Turkey the freest majority Muslim country.[8] But, even if it compares favorably to other majority Muslim countries, Turkey is not a fully democratic state. Its national security council, Milli G?venlik Kurulu (MGK), was long run by the military and is still dominated by the military.[9] While not the most democratic institution?the MGK could, in practice, overrule parliament?the organization has secured the secular character of Turkey much as Iran's Council of Guardians intervenes to ensure that country's Islamist character. Ironically, even as European officials applauded reforms that, in August 2004, bestowed a civilian head and civilian majority upon the MGK, Turkey has become less democratic.

Today, the AKP party with almost a two-thirds majority in parliament, rules Turkey like a one-party state. The party ignores the opposition and has abandoned efforts to reach out to any constituency beyond Anatolian Islamists. It awards state positions, for example, almost exclusively to Islamists.[10] Still, even as Ankara backslides away from democracy, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdo?an and President Abdullah G?l leverage the European Union accession process to create an illusion of tolerance and reform.

Turkey's Approach to Europe

In a sense, the AKP's Islamism and European outreach illustrate a paradox in the way Muslims approach Europe: Either they favor Europeanization of Islam or Islamization of Europe.[11] With reform and accommodation, Islam can be compatible with democracy, but Islamism cannot. In the world of Islam, Islamism aims at reversing the process of cultural modernization. Today, acculturation and secularization are reversed into re-traditionalization, de-acculturation, and de-secularization. The ongoing de-Westernization in Turkish society is clear. There have been three Islamist parties since the 1970s with a real chance of acquiring power. All three were judicially invalidated?the Milli Selamet Partisi in 1980, the Refah Partisi in 1998, and the Fizelet Partisi in 2001?for the threat they posed to secularity in Turkey.[12]

Each of the Islamist leaders pursued different strategies. Ne?metten Erbakan who, as Refah leader, became Turkey's first Islamist prime minister, combined Islamism with neo-Ottomanism?an ideological revival of Ottoman glory?and pan-Turkish outlooks. The Erdo?an generation of Islamists, in contrast, presents itself in European terms, but its commitment to both Europe and democracy is instrumental. As Hudson Institute scholar Zeyno Baran explains, the AKP's commitment to democracy rests not on philosophical agreement with its principles but rather because "democratic elections ? [have] proven to be the easiest and most legitimate path to power."[13]

Europeanized Islam embraces the values of cultural modernity, pluralism, and secular tolerance. Secularism and religious tolerance have, in many ways, provided the basis of European cultural development. Despite its Christian roots, Europe has been secular since the Renaissance and Enlightenment. Polemics that insist that the European Union is reluctant to accept an Islamic country into its fold are false. Europe was Europeanized through "the spread of one particular culture."[14] There is no reason why Turkish assimilation into Europe could not Europeanize Turkey just as the EU has Europeanized Spain, Greece, Poland, and in part, Romania. Turkey, after all, is contiguous with Europe and shares a common Byzantine heritage with much of southern Europe, including not only the Balkan states but also much of Greece.

Ottoman modernity, however, never accepted the spirit of Europe. It was based on the adoption of European instruments and technology but the rejection of European values. Such instrumental Europeanization did not stabilize the Islamic-Ottoman rule but rather contributed to its downfall. The Kemalist revolution arose from the failure of the Young Ottomans and Young Turks. Atat?rk's agenda was the Europeanization of Turkey, not only technologically but also with the adoption of cultural outlooks based on modern values and norms. The Kemalist revolution sought to give Turkey a civilizational identity defined not by religion but rather by cultural values shared with Europe: secularism, individual human rights, civil society, and the rule of law. The problem with Atat?rk's Europeanization of Turkey was that the process was a revolution from above, imposing innovations on society without providing the necessary cultural underpinning. By focusing on urban centers, it left the countryside barely affected. The result was a bifurcation of society: a European, urban culture in Istanbul, Ankara, and Izmir, and a rural society deeply rooted in Islamic tradition.[15]

The AKP, however, does not accept Europeanization. Rather, AKP leaders pursue a double strategy: They verbally dissociate their party?and themselves?from political Islam while simultaneously embracing Islamic identity politics and, like many Islamist parties across the globe, also engaging in anti-Christian polemics.[16] The AKP uses education as its major instrument to further Islamist identity politics, introduce reinvented Islamic values, and de-Westernize society. And while the AKP claims secular credit for pursuing Turkey's EU membership, it defames Europe as an exclusionary "club of Christians."[17] Since its November 2002 accession, the AKP has engaged in a "creeping Islamization."[18] The AKP has sought to further this through politics of cultural Islamization, especially in education and media. Erdo?an has worked to expand Anatolian culture in the cities, helped by internal migration. The slums and shanty towns have become the AKP's chief base of support.

Needed: Islam's Europeanization

The problem of both Turkey's entry into the European Union and the Turkish diaspora in Europe is not Islam itself but rather how to encourage the Turkish diaspora's Europeanization. If Turkey were to become a secular, European-style democracy, it would face no obstacles to European Union accession, nor would such a strong boundary exist between Turkey and Europe if Turkey's religion were a more civil Islam.[19]

What Turkey needs is not simply a laundry list of civil reforms but Europeanization of Islam. There is nothing European about the ghettos of Turkish migrants living in Islamic enclaves in Berlin suburbs such Neuk?ln and Kreuzberg. These "Muslim enclaves"?including the Turkish ones?are "in the West, but not of it."[20] The AKP encourages such a division, though. In February 2008, Erdo?an labeled assimilation of Turks a "crime against humanity."[21] The Turkish diaspora in Europe remains antagonistic to their new home. The two major Turkish mosques in Germany?in Pforzheim and Bremen?are named Fatih (conqueror) after Ottoman Sultan Mehmet the Conqueror who, in 1453, captured the Byzantine capital of Constantinople, modern day Istanbul.

Most Turks in Germany are not integrated into civil society. If Turkey, as the AKP sees it, enters the European Union, it would resemble more the Kreuzberg and Neuk?ln enclaves than the European parts of Istanbul or Ankara. While Erdo?an says his decision to guide Turkey toward Europe is firm, declaring, for example, that "Turkey has no other alternative than the full membership of the EU,"[22] it is less certain whether Europe could absorb a country ruled by Islamists.

The question of whether Turks can or will adopt a Europeanized Islam is crucial because demography and migration suggest that Europe will be dealing with Turkey for years to come. Turkish migration westward is not simply a twentieth and twenty-first century phenomenon but part of a larger pattern that began almost a millennium ago.[23] Many Turks joined Ottoman incursions into southeast Europe for opportunity and adventure.[24] Turkey's European Union accession would lead to a similar movement of population. The European Union's living standard and generous welfare system will attract Turkey's rural population, which suffers from an unemployment rate between 20 and 30 percent, and where many do not receive welfare benefits.[25] Indeed, some Turkish politicians have suggested that this migration should make Turkey more attractive to Europe arguing that Turkey can offer Europe, with its aging and declining populations, a young Turkish population. There is something to this. Turkish population figures have doubled since 1970 while Western European states have a shrinking population due to low birth rates and an aging population.[26] No doubt, migration would be an advantage for Europe, as much as it has been for the United States, provided that Europe, like the United States, assimilates its immigrants.

Given the AKP's instrumental approach to EU accession, it is ironic that while the European public largely opposes Turkey's accession, European diplomats still push the Turks to undermine the three pillars of the secular republic?the military, judiciary, and educational system?purportedly to make Turkey fit into the European Union. While European officials couch their prescribed reforms in the language of transformational diplomacy and democracy promotions, they ignore that Islamists only accept democracy as the rule of the majority, not as a culture of pluralism. At the World Economic Forum in Davos in 1999, the late prime minister B?lent Ecevet responded to European criticism of the imbalance of power between the parliament and the MGK by explaining, "In your countries, the political culture [of] secularity is well established, and therefore, there is no need for a guardian to protect it. In my country, Turkey, secularism still lacks firm foundations and can always be threatened, therefore the need to protect it."[27]

The Turkish writer Murat ?ak?r described the Islamists as "pseudo-democrats," who use democracy as a cover for the promotion of Islamization whether in Turkey itself or among the Turkish diaspora in Europe.[28] He observes that Ankara does not contribute to Europeanizing the Turkish Muslim diaspora. Mosques, built and administered by the Turkish state through the Diyanet ??leri Ba?kanl??? (directorate of religious affairs), are not European even if they are moderate in comparison to the more militant Milli G?r?? mosques.[29] The difference between the Diyanet and Milli G?r?? mosques, however, has eroded since AKP accession led to its control of the Diyanet.

The secular commitment to democracy and to its values does not register in the Islamist model of an Islamic state (din-?-devlet), which the AKP's actions show it accepts. Why then have Western policies toward Turkey not changed under AKP rule? Part of the problem is that Europe does not have a clear awareness of its civilizational identity. In contrast, migrants and Turkey itself strongly cultivate civilizational awareness in their own identity politics. The Islamist challenge and the potential of Islamization are based on facts, but they are not well understood in Europe. The Turkish diaspora in Europe, as well as the population in Turkey itself, is caught between Europeanization and Islamization. The European decision-makers have proven in the past to be incapable of designing policies to address challenges arising from ethnic-cultural diversification of the population. European officials neglect or simply ignore cultural issues such as the identity of Europe and Europeanization.

The AKP Abandons Compromise

Compromising and power sharing are an essential part of democratic politics. Repeated experience with Islamists show that they go to the ballots but fail to compromise when they win. The AKP is no exception. Erdo?an wanted to promote his foreign minister, Abdullah G?l, to the presidency in 2007, and he did so at the expense of a traditional process of consensus-building among opposition parties and so sparked a political crisis. While the AKP won subsequent parliamentary elections, its victory had as much to do with the weakness of the secularist parties as with satisfaction with the AKP. The 2007 election win enabled the AKP to retrench, sending G?l to ?ankaya palace as the first non-secular president of Turkey.

With its majority solidified and no longer fearing the veto of a secular president, the AKP accelerated its de-secularization of Turkish society. Here, the head scarf is especially important. Among Islamists, the head scarf is not just an article of clothing but an icon of civilizational divide. Islamists view the head scarf as a provision of the Shari?a.[30] It has become symbolic of the tension between Europeanization and Islamization. In a 2004 ruling, the European Court of Human Rights found the right to a head scarf not to be a human right, thus dismissing an Islamist lawsuit.[31] Upon their reelection, though, the AKP decided to provoke secular elites with legislation enabling female university students to wear a head scarf on campus and in classes. On June 5, 2008, the Turkish Supreme Court deemed the AKP's law to be unconstitutional on the grounds that it eroded Turkey's secular character.[32] Soon after, the London-based pan-Arabic daily Al-Hayat quoted Erdo?an as stating, "We are going to shut down the constitutional court."[33] Many Europeans have cheered Erdo?an and condemned court actions in Turkey. AKP partisans in the Turkish press and proponents of Turkey as a model of moderate Islam in the United States and Europe labeled Turkish secularists as "fascists" and accused them of undermining "democratic" Islamists.[34] Zeyno Baran observed that such an artificial dichotomy "inadvertently strengthens hard-line Islamists."[35] As the West sides with the Islamists, the opposition, feeling abandoned, has become more anti-Western. Again, Baran explains, "The opposition's anti-Western stand is more like that of a lover with a broken heart ? [they] fear that Europeans push them to undertake reforms that will make Turkey more Islamic, and then will tell them that they are too Islamic to join a Western club."[36]

The crisis continued into the summer as the Constitutional Court heard arguments that the AKP had violated the principles of a democratic and secular Turkish republic.[37] Had the court dissolved the party, it would have toppled the government and plunged the country into political turmoil.[38] The court wanted to avoid this outcome as it would have ended the AKP but not the Islamist challenge. The AKP could simply have transferred its assets to another party and reemerged under a new name, just as the AKP had emerged from the ashes of Fezilet. The court did not acquit the AKP, however, but instead gave it a strong warning to stop steering Turkey away from the secular order that the constitution mandates towards an Islamic one. Court president Ha?im Kili? stated, "There is no verdict on closure ? However, in this ruling a serious warning has been issued to the party [AKP], and I hope this conclusion will be elevated and will be taken accordingly."[39]

Secularism Abandoned

Western politicians, scholars, and opinion leaders barely understand what is going on in Turkey. Too many Western pundits depict Turkey's increasing Islamism as fortuitous. The Rand Corporation's Stephen Larrabee, for example, wrote, "Under the AKP, Turkey has emerged as an important diplomatic actor in the region ? without the AKP ? the United States would lose an important partner in trying to stabilize this volatile region ? At the same time, banning the party could undercut efforts to promote reform and democracy in the Middle East."[40] Such views infuriate secular Turks. It is ironic that the intra-Turkish debate on the pernicious nature of Islamism has been more open than the Western one.

In the name of democratic reforms, as European diplomats have observed, the AKP has reduced the secular impact of the army, defamed judicial defense of the constitution as a "judicial coup," expanded the Imam Hatip religious schools and equated them to secular schools, and fired university presidents. Too many in the West praise the AKP as "moderate Islamic." The only difference, however, between moderate and jihadist Islamists is the use of the ballot box instead of violence to come to power. It may be important to include Islamists in democracy but certainly not with the Western naive notion that inclusion will tame Islamism. This is the lesson that should be drawn from Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and certain Islamist parties in Iraq.

Hamas and Hezbollah may be represented in parliaments, but they have kept their militias that represent the antithesis of democracy. They show how their embrace of the democratic game is only a tactical step. The AKP may be better than Hamas and Hezbollah since it has no militia although its dominance and use of the police force and secret services have become nearly as abusive.

The proper solution for crisis-ridden Turkey is neither the tacit Islamic law of the AKP nor a coup by the Turkish secularists. Rather, the European Union and the United States should encourage the strengthening of civil society by making the weak institutions of Turkish democracy stronger. Moderate Islamists want to Islamize, not democratize.[41] They are committed to the procedure of democracy but not to its pluralistic and peaceful political culture. Political Islam in Turkey is an important issue for Europe. Turkey not only has close relations to the West, but it also has a diaspora of more than four million in the European Union.[42] While many moderate Muslims seek to Europeanize Islam, the Islamism practiced by the AKP is an ideology of cultural divide, tension, and conflict, despite all of the pro-Europe rhetoric in which Islamists in Turkey engage in their pursuit to exploit the European Union for their agenda of Islamization.

Bassam Tibi is a professor of international relations at G?ttingen University in Germany and A.D. White Professor-at-Large at Cornell University. His most recent book is Political Islam, World Politics and Europe (New York: Routledge 2008).

Islamist terrorism may have its roots in the Middle East, but it has long since expanded globally. Indonesia, the most populous Muslim country, is no exception. Jemaah Islamiyah has for more than fifteen years fought to transform Indonesia into an Islamist state. In recent years, its terrorist campaign has suffered setbacks. As Jemaah Islamiyah regroups, it builds upon the experience of Middle East terrorist groups. From Al-Qaeda, it adopts philosophical underpinnings that guide its dual strategy. From Hamas and Hezbollah, it borrows an "inverse triangle model" in which a broad network of social services supports a smaller jihadist core, and from Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf emirates it adopts a model of charities and NGOs that help Jemaah Islamiyah advance its jihadist goals.

Islamist terrorism may have its roots in the Middle East, but it has long since expanded globally. Indonesia, the most populous Muslim country, is no exception. Jemaah Islamiyah has for more than fifteen years fought to transform Indonesia into an Islamist state. In recent years, its terrorist campaign has suffered setbacks. As Jemaah Islamiyah regroups, it builds upon the experience of Middle East terrorist groups. From Al-Qaeda, it adopts philosophical underpinnings that guide its dual strategy. From Hamas and Hezbollah, it borrows an "inverse triangle model" in which a broad network of social services supports a smaller jihadist core, and from Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf emirates it adopts a model of charities and NGOs that help Jemaah Islamiyah advance its jihadist goals.

What Is Jemaah Islamiyah?

Jemaah Islamiyah's engagement in politics is a cynical short-term tactic in its long-term strategy to eradicate democracy. Founder Abu Bakar Ba'asyir has said, "The democratic system is not the Islamic way. It is forbidden. Democracy is based on people, but the state must be based on God's law?I call it Allahcracy."

Jemaah Islamiyah was founded sometime in 1992 or 1993 by former members of Darul Islam, an Islamist movement that emerged during Indonesia's fight for independence from the Netherlands but that continued armed struggle for more than a decade after independence. Members of Darul Islam grew especially frustrated with their political emasculation under Muhammad Suharto's rule (1965-98). Jemaah Islamiyah's founders, Abdullah Sungkar and Abu Bakar Ba'asyir, conceptualized the group as a covert organization that would topple the secular state through a combination of political agitation and violence. Jemaah Islamiyah's primary founding document, Pedoman Umum Perjuangan al-Jama'ah al-Islamiyyah (PUPJI, The general guidebook for the struggle of Jemaah Islamiyah) outlines the role of clandestine cells and describes the Islamist struggle in terms of guerilla warfare. By the end of the decade, Jemaah Islamiyah had become an Al-Qaeda affiliate, receiving financial and material support from the group. Several top Jemaah Islamiyah operatives even received instruction in Afghan training camps.[1] Soon after its founding, Jemaah Islamiyah became an Al-Qaeda affiliate.

Jemaah Islamiyah sought advantage from the collapse of Suharto's authoritarian rule and Indonesia's descent into a chaotic decentralized democracy. Beginning in 1998, Jemaah Islamiyah launched the "uhud project," whose goal was ridding regions of the country of both Christians and Hindus in order to establish pure Muslim enclaves, governed by Shari?a (Islamic law). Its two paramilitaries, Laskar Mujahidin in the Moluccas and Laskar Jundullah in Central Sulawesi, engaged in sectarian bloodletting against Christians and Hindus until, in 2002, the government was able to broker the Malino accords, enabling a fragile truce. Meanwhile, Jemaah Islamiyah began a bombing campaign in 2000, killing several hundred people, including 202 in one attack in October 2002 at a Bali disco.

Indonesian authorities fought back. Security forces arrested more than 450 Jemaah Islamiyah members, prosecuted over 250 terrorists, and eviscerated the organization's regional cell system. Victory was not complete, however. More than a dozen hardened Jemaah Islamiyah leaders remain at large; some, such as Noordin Muhammad Top, have significant organizational skills. Others, such as Zulkarnaen and Dulmatin, have technical and military capabilities. As recently as June 2008, police raids have netted large caches of bombs and bomb-making material,[2] suggesting that Jemaah Islamiyah's commitment to terrorism remains high.

Justifying a Soft Power Strategy

With the exception of Ali Ghufreon (known also as Mukhlas), awaiting execution for his role in the 2002 Bali bombing, Southeast Asian jihadists have no important homegrown theoreticians. Jemaah Islamiyah has filled the gap by drawing upon the works of Al-Qaeda's three most important thinkers?Abu Musab as-Suri, whose main work is the 2002 tract "Call to Worldwide Islamic Resistance"; Abu Bakr Naji, who wrote the 2004 document "The Management of Savagery"; and Abdul Qadir (Dr. Fadl), who, in November 2007, penned "Rationalizing Jihad in Egypt and the World."

Together, these authors provide theoretical sustenance to Jemaah Islamiyah's revitalization of Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia, a civil society organization affiliated with Jemaah Islamiyah, and other overt organizations. Suri, for example, argued that Al-Qaeda's blanket opposition to democracy was counterproductive and that jihadists should instead work with Islamist political leaders and parties. Naji concurred. "If we meditate on the factor common to the movements which have remained, we find there is political action in addition to military action," he explained. "We urge that the leaders work to master political science just as they would to master military science." Naji's specific recommendations that jihadists be able to justify their actions in Islamic law and reach the people directly without reliance on state media parallel the strategy implemented in Egypt by Sayyid Qutb who, in the Muslim Brotherhood, combined a mass-based movement and a network of covert cells. Jemaah Islamiyah has also adopted the substance of Qadir's tract which argued that most terrorism is illegal by Islamic law, that violent jihad should only be waged in defense, and that fighting Muslim leaders, even those decried as apostates, is illegal unless rebellion would lead to tangible improvement in Muslims' lives.[3]

Today, Jemaah Islamiyah pursues a three-front strategy of recruitment and expansion of cells, religious indoctrination and training of its members, and instigation of sectarian conflict. Indeed, Noordin Mohammad Top wrote an 82-page tract about how to establish jihadi cells on a six-month timetable.

The PUPJI outlines the three phases of jihad: iman (faith of individuals), hijrah (building a base of operations), and then jihad qital (fighting the enemies of Islam). One section of the PUPJI, "Al-Manhaj al-Harakiy Li Iqomatid Dien (The general manual for operations)," states that Jemaah Islamiyah can engage in overt activities in order to proselytize and build a base of support. But the bulk of the document is a guide for clandestine operations and cell-building, the path Jemaah Islamiyah leaders most closely follow.

The Rebound

After the Indonesian crackdown that began in 2003, Jemaah Islamiyah reverted to recruitment and indoctrination for several years, but it has again begun to build a base of operations, especially in Central Sulawesi and the Moluccas. As the group sought to recover from the blows inflicted by Indonesian counterterror forces, debate raged about how to move forward. The International Crisis Group's Sydney Jones, a leading expert on Indonesia, describes factional rifts inside Jemaah Islamiyah between proponents of sectarian bloodletting and those who wish to target the Indonesian government and Western targets.[4] Such strategies, however, are not mutually exclusive. Since 2004, Jemaah Islamiyah has increased bombings, assassinations, and raids on military and police facilities. The November 2005 beheadings of three Hindu schoolgirls was meant to undermine confidence in the state.[5]

By provoking sectarian attacks, Jemaah Islamiyah can broaden its definition of a defensive jihad. Such vigilantism enables it to contend that Jakarta has abdicated responsibility by not coming to the defense of the Muslim community, enabling Jemaah Islamiyah to pursue its goals with greater popular support. Since mid-2006, the Indonesian police have taken seriously the threat of sectarian violence after uncovering documents emphasizing the centrality of sectarian bloodletting to Jemaah Islamiyah's efforts to regroup.

Religious indoctrination has become a parallel component of Jemaah Islamiyah strategy. The group has sent high-level cells to Pakistan for advanced religious training. In 2003, for example, Jemaah Islamiyah sent nineteen children or brothers of high-ranking Jemaah Islamiyah members to study in the Lashkar e-Toiba madrasa, an Islamic school in Lahore, Pakistan, which has ties to the Taliban. Although Pakistani security arrested and deported them in fall 2004,[6] Jemaah Islamiyah has been able to conduct more such training in Indonesia where the group runs a network of approximately sixty madrasas and has launched its own publishing houses: Al-Alaq, the Arafah Group, the Al-Qowam Group, the Aqwam Group, and Kafayeh Cipta Media.[7]

Such a strategy is not unique to Indonesia and, indeed, has been frequently practiced in the Middle East. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood regrouped in the wake of the Egyptian government's mid-1990s crackdown by concentrating on mosques, publishing, and proselytizing.[8] Likewise, for more than a decade before Israeli Arabs became involved in Palestinian violence, the Islamic Movement within Israel maintained its own educational institutions and publication houses in the Israeli town of Umm al-Fahm.[9] Lebanon, too, has become home to a number of Islamist publishing houses.

Jemaah Islamiyah's Inverse Triangle

Like many Middle Eastern Islamist groups, Jemaah Islamiyah has embraced the inverse triangle in which a broad range of charities and nongovernmental agencies (NGOs) serve as cover for a narrower terrorist mission. And like many Islamist groups in the Middle East, as Jemaah Islamiyah regroups, it shows no intention of abandoning its core ideology even as some Indonesian officials wishfully see moderation where none exists. As the organization seeks to rebuild, it becomes an example of how Al-Qaeda affiliates, beaten back by successful counterterror strategies, regroup using both the democratic process they simultaneously fight and the legitimacy naively bestowed by the international community on any organization that calls itself a nongovernmental organization.

Jemaah Islamiyah has adopted a Hezbollah model of social organization in which most of the group's activities are overt charitable work and provision of social services even as a component of the organization clandestinely pursues terrorism. Beginning in the 1980s, Hezbollah, a Lebanese Shi?i political group founded by Iran in the wake of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, began to construct a large network of educational institutions and social services both to complement their military wing and to serve as a recruitment tool. Slowly, Hezbollah built a state within a state in Lebanon, preventing anyone within its territory the option of remaining outside the group's influence. Even as Hezbollah conducts terrorist activities against Israel and within Lebanon itself, many in the international community refuse to define the group as a terrorist organization, in effect arguing that social work is exculpatory.[10]

Hamas has implemented the same model. While Hamas is a lethal terrorist organization that has employed at least sixty suicide bombings since the second intifada began in September 2000, many Palestinians and Europeans argue that the group's network of schools, orphanages, clinics, and social welfare organizations bestows some legitimacy.[11] In Iraq, too, militia leaders pursue the same strategy. Abdul Aziz Hakim, the leader of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, has employed not only the Badr Corps, which has sponsored terrorism and conducted violent operations, but also the Shahid al-Mihrab Foundation, a charitable organization run by his son, Amar al-Hakim.

In Jemaah Islamiyah's case, the base of the inverse triangle is Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia, an umbrella organization for political parties, NGOs, civil society organizations, and individuals committed to transforming Indonesia into an Islamic state.[12] Created in 1999, the organization has an office in Yogyakarta, publishes conspiracy-laden and vehemently anti-Semitic and anti-American books through Wihdah Press and its own magazine, Risalah Mujahidin, lobbies political officials, and in 2001 and 2003, held high-profile national conferences.[13] Muhammad Jibril, son of Jemaah Islamiyah leader Muhammad Iqbal Abdurrahman, runs Ar-Rahman Media, its multimedia publishing house. The use of diverse institutions is deliberate, even as the antipathy toward Indonesian democracy is pronounced. Muhammad Jibril told Al-Jazeera,

We want an Islamic state where Islamic law is not just in the books but enforced, and enforced with determination. There is no space and no room for democratic consultation.[14]

At a November 2006 sermon at a mosque in Kediri, East Java, Jemaah Islamiyah founder Ba'asyir urged his followers to go abroad to wage jihad, though without explaining why. "If you want to go on jihad, do not do it here [Indonesia] but in the southern Philippines or even in Iraq." He said the Bali bombers were legitimate jihadis even if their jihad was "not at the right time or place." Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia may have switched tactics with regard to the desirability of terrorism inside Indonesia, but they have not altered their commitment to violent jihad.

Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia has to some extent become Jemaah Islamiyah's equivalent of Sinn Fein, the political party that existed solely to mirror the Irish Republican Army's aims. Jemaah Islamiyah uses Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia to achieve whatever aims it can through the democratic process. Thus, the Majelis Mujahidin advocates for Islamic law components to all major bills and laws. It seeks, for example, to push Indonesian penal law into conformity with Islamic law[15]and has urged local Islamic communities to lobby regional representatives for Islamic law at the local level.[16] It is a strategy that is both well organized and effective. Nearly forty regional governments have taken steps to implement Islamic law, regulate interaction between men and women, obligate Qur'an reading, and ban alcohol.[17] The group has also pressured the media to replace secular programming with Islamic programming, legislating to force civil servants to wear Islamic dress, and mandating Arabic literacy.

Jemaah Islamiyah's engagement in the political process is a cynical short-term tactic in its longer-term strategy to eradicate democracy. "The democratic system is not the Islamic way," Ba'asyir explained. "It is forbidden. Democracy is based on people, but the state must be based on God's law?I call it Allahcracy."[18] "Islam's victory can only come though da'wa and jihad, not elections."[19] Many of Jemaah Islamiyah leaders hold concurrent positions in Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia, giving themselves a patina of legitimacy and political cover. Since his release from prison in October 2004, Abdurrahman (Abu Jibril), for example, has used Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia as his base of operations. But his message has not necessarily changed. In one recruiting film produced by Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia, Abdurrahman calls on his congregants to wage a violent jihad. Armed with a pistol extended into the air he exclaimed, "You can't just have the Qur'an without the steel. You will bring down the steel."[20] His younger brother remains Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia's director of daily operations.[21]

Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia has grown increasingly confident and combative in dealing with the government, which it accuses of leading a witch hunt against Muslims. Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia has begun issuing "summons," or official complaints, to the police in order to intimidate them and influence investigations of suspected terrorists. In May 2006, for example, it issued a summons to the Indonesian National Police specialized counterterrorism unit, Detachment 88, for their raid on a Jemaah Islamiyah safe house in Central Java, in which two suspects were killed and two others were arrested.[22] As Ba'asyir said, "The struggle for Islam can only come through crisis and confrontation."[23]

Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia also serves as a link between Jemaah Islamiyah and Saudi financiers. Many Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia leaders hold or have held concurrent positions in Saudi charities and their Indonesian counterparts that have been used to support terrorist activities.[24] These include the Saudi Al-Haramain and the International Islamic Relief Organization. Two Indonesian charities, KOMPAK and the Medical Emergency Relief Charity, respectively serve as their counterpart or executing agencies. While U.S. Executive Order 13224 and the U.N.'s 1267 Committee on January 22, 2004, designated the Indonesian branch of Al-Haramain as a funder of terrorism, four months after the designation, Al-Haramain was operating openly in East Java.[25]

KOMPAK

Jemaah Islamiyah used or co-opted many of these charities between 1999 and 2001, during a period of sectarian bloodletting in the Molucca Islands between Jemaah Islamiyah's paramilitaries and Christian and Hindu citizens. Dewan Dakwah Islam Indonesia, a hard-line Islamist offshoot of the Muhammadiyah, the national Islamic organization, established KOMPAK in late 1998 ostensibly to provide relief assistance to people in conflict areas, such as Kalimantan, the Moluccas, and Central Sulawesi. It immediately partnered with the Saudi International Islamic Relief Organization although it recently suffered a setback when, on August 3, 2006, the U.S. Treasury Department designated the Indonesian branch of the International Islamic Relief Organization, along with the Philippine branch and a Saudi director of the International Islamic Relief Organization, for financing terrorism, including Al-Qaeda. The United Nations Security Council 1267 Committee acted in concert although it did not designate the Indonesian branch of the International Islamic Relief Organization as a financier of terrorism until November 9, 2006.[26] While KOMPAK did not engage in conflict directly, its aid won support for Jemaah Islamiyah and its paramilitary organizations such as Laskar Jundullah and Laskar Mujahidin.

Of the thirteen regional directors of KOMPAK, at least three were top-level Jemaah Islamiyah operatives.[27] KOMPAK, however, only came to the assistance of Muslim communities, which it worked to radicalize. KOMPAK officials, while acknowledging that they operate in regions struck by sectarian conflict such as Aceh, Poso, the Moluccas, and Bangunan Beton Sumatra, assert they alleviate the crises and provide necessary relief. They deny any links to jihad activities.[28] In 2003, Indonesian forces arrested several KOMPAK leaders for their involvement in sectarian violence and terrorism; several others went underground.

As with other jihadist organizations and corollary charities in North Africa, Iraq, Chechnya, and elsewhere, KOMPAK's support is not entirely indigenous. It serves as the executing agency of many Saudi and Persian Gulf funds, including from Al-Haramain and the International Islamic Relief Organization.

Aris Munandar, a top KOMPAK and Al-Haramain official, was a key financial conduit between Al-Qaeda and Jemaah Islamiyah. Agus Dwikarna not only served as head of KOMPAK for South Sulawesi but also was the regional branch officer for the International Islamic Relief Organization and treasurer of Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia. Munandar, who was a leading member of Jemaah Islamiyah, used KOMPAK to support both the sectarian bloodletting in the Moluccas and Sulawesi and Al-Qaeda operatives' training of Jemaah Islamiyah members.[29] KOMPAK also produced a number of jihadi videos for fundraising and recruitment purposes.

The Indonesian crackdown broke KOMPAK into disparate cells, but the organization did not cease its commitment to radicalization. One such splinter group, KOMPAK in Ambon, conducted the October 2005 Bali II bombings. Indonesian prosecutors believe that one mid-level Jemaah Islamiyah operative, Abdullah Sonata, received 11 million rupiah (US$15,000) and 100,000 Saudi riyals ($36,500) in 2004 from a Saudi named Syeikh Abu Muhammad to finance militant operations and to send Jemaah Islamiyah terrorists to Mindanao. Other KOMPAK members acquired weaponry with which to instigate a new wave of sectarian bloodletting in Central Sulawesi and the Moluccas.[30] Dulmatin, who is one of Jemaah Islamiyah's leading operatives and has been in hiding in the southern Philippines since early 2004, ordered other KOMPAK members to dispatch suicide bombers to the Philippines. Abdullah Sonata asserted that he sent ten although only four got through.[31]

It is clear, therefore, that the KOMPAK network, funded by Saudi charities, helped develop Jemaah Islamiyah. It also illustrates clearly that terrorist organizations can be created from social networks.

Hambali, Jemaah Islamiyah's top operative in Malaysia, established other charities including Pertubahan el Hassan, as conduits for funds to both Jemaah Islamiyah, its paramilitaries in the Moluccas, and the Medical Emergency Relief Charity. Initially, these charities served as ancillary organizations used to assist with jihadist activities. Over the last two years, however, Jemaah Islamiyah has begun to focus far more on charities. While the Indonesian military has made inroads tracking down terrorist leaders, the Indonesian government has been more willing to tolerate Jemaah Islamiyah charities in the belief that it can wean Jemaah Islamiyah leaders from violence and that it is better to have them involved in overt and nonviolent activities. Jakarta has, therefore, been unwilling to enforce United Nations Security Council 1267 Committee or U.S. Department of the Treasury designations, which make it illegal to raise funds for or donate to any proscribed individual or organization. The Indonesian government's strategy appears to mirror that of the Lebanese government's strategy with regard to Hezbollah. Beirut and many Western powers long tolerated Hezbollah, convinced that incorporating it into the Lebanese government might moderate the group. However, in Lebanon, such accommodation backfired precisely because the charities were only one aspect of a much broader strategy that included immutable commitment to jihad.

Tsunami and Earthquake

The December 2004 tsunami and the May 2006 earthquake in central Java, both massive humanitarian crises, provide a window into just how Jemaah Islamiyah and its charities operate to further Islamist agendas.

On December 26, 2004, an earthquake off the coast of Sumatra caused a tsunami which killed more than 165,000 Indonesians and displaced half a million others. Jakarta, overwhelmed by the magnitude of the disaster, sought to tap Jemaah Islamiyah's social service network. On January 4, 2005, Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia dispatched the first group of seventy-seven volunteers to Aceh from their Yogyakarta based headquarters.[32] Among them was a top Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia official who was a suspect in the October 12, 2002 Bali blast that killed 202 people.[33] Not all Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia personnel were engaged explicitly in humanitarian work; the group indicated that their primary goal was to provide "spiritual guidance" to victims, assist in the reconstruction of mosques, and guard against proselytizing by non-Muslim relief agencies. Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia's non-humanitarian agenda led the Indonesian Air Force to expel nineteen Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia members from Aceh on January 11, 2005.[34]

Abdurrahman's Laskar Mujahidin also used the tsunami to propel itself to new relevance. Founded in January 2000 by Abdurrahman and Hambali, both of whom had experience fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan, the group fielded approximately 500 armed combatants in the Moluccas who were equipped with high-speed motor boats, which they used to attack remote Christian and Hindu communities. After the tsunami, they established four base camps in Aceh including one outside the airport, adjacent to the camps of other domestic and international relief organizations, beneath a sign that read, "Islamic Law Enforcement." Unlike Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia, which was more concerned with providing "spiritual guidance" and restoring "infrastructure in places of religious duties," the Laskar Mujahidin was deeply involved in relief work, including the distribution of aid and especially the burial of corpses.[35] Though the organization is vehemently anti-American, it gave cautious backing to the presence of U.S. and Australian troops.[36] It was clear, however, that their lobbying did persuade the government to call for the early departure of foreign troops.

Joining Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia and Laskar Mujahidin was the Medical Emergency Relief Charity (MERC), an Indonesian executor agency for Saudi funding.[37] Established on August 14, 1999, amidst sectarian fighting, MERC now has twelve offices in Indonesia, concentrated in the regions most directly affected by sectarian violence. In 2000-01, MERC produced two well-publicized jihadi videos for fundraising purposes.[38] While MERC was never directly implicated in supporting Laskar Jundullah and Laskar Mujahidin paramilitary operations to the degree that KOMPAK was, its one-sided approach to the Moluccas conflict, as well as the actions of some individual members, raised suspicions. There is some evidence that MERC received funding from the Indonesian branch of the Saudi-funded International Islamic Relief Organization.[39] MERC operations abroad, in particular in Iraq, the Palestinian territories, Afghanistan, and Chechnya, have also raised concerns about it being a conduit for terrorist funding. MERC sent a team of four doctors and other staff to Iraq in 2003. In 2004, U.S. forces killed one MERC employee, an ambulance driver, in a firefight. The group's website stated that they operate in the tribal areas of Pakistan with the support and permission of the Taliban. Other Islamist organizations such as the Islamic Defenders Front and Hizb ut-Tahrir, though not directly connected to Jemaah Islamiyah, have also become active in Aceh in the wake of the tsunami. Both groups have engaged in sectarian violence.[40]

The Islamist charities flocked to Aceh for three reasons. The first was to garner good press and media attention, providing a needed makeover for groups associated with terrorism and sectarian violence while simultaneously highlighting the secular government's failure. Second, the Islamist charities sought to counter any Western influence.[41] Hence, Din Syamsudin, the head of the quasi-official Indonesian Ulema Council and president of the second largest Muslim organization in the country, Muhammadiyah, who has subsequently acted as a fundraiser for Hamas, warned:

All nongovernmental organizations, either domestic or international ... This is a reminder. Do not do this [proselytize] in this kind of situation. The Muslim community will not remain quiet. This is a clear statement, and it is serious.[42]

Paranoia about Western influence has become a prime motivator for Islamist groups in the Middle East. Prior to the rise of Al-Qaeda, for example, Saudi clergy preached that the Muslim world was subject to a Western "cultural attack" and "intellectual attack." In 1981, the World Muslim League, a Saudi NGO, published a book entitled, The Means of Combating the Intellectual Attack on the Muslim World, which highlighted a theme developed by ?Abdullah ?Azzam, a professor at King ?Abd al-?Aziz University in Jeddah and mentor to Osama bin Laden.[43] Defense against a "cultural NATO" is a theme that Iranian hardliners have also recently adapted.[44] Hence, almost two years after the tsunami, Ba'asyir declared that "naked women are more dangerous than bombs" in his salvo about spiritual pollution and Western culture and values degrading Islam from within.[45]

Third, these groups saw the disaster as an opportunity to proselytize. Several groups in addition to Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia indicated that their primary goal was to provide "spiritual guidance" to victims, ensure that Islamic law was being followed, and to assist in the reconstruction of mosques. With 400,000 refugees and mosques at the center of rural community relief efforts, the potential for influence was great.[46]

The cynicism of the Islamist parties grated on local political movements. While Aceh is nearly 100 percent Muslim, the Acehenese secessionist movement, the Free Aceh Movement known by its acronym GAM (Gerakan Aceh Meredeka), urged the international community to force the Islamist groups to leave in apparent frustration with the government's unwillingness to do so:

We therefore call on the international community to demand that the FPI [Front Pembela Islam] and Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia leave Acheh ? The FPI and Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia are not welcome in Acheh and have never been supported by the Achenese people, nor has their presence been requested. The FPI has been involved in sectarian killings in Maluku and Central Sulawesi and illegal attacks against non-Muslims and others in Java and elsewhere. Their intervention in Aceh is therefore counterproductive.[47]

Tsunami relief efforts provided a template for subsequent operations, most notably in the May 27, 2006 earthquake in central Java. The magnitude 6.2 earthquake killed more than 6,000 people, injured 78,000, and left up to 1.5 million homeless. The United Nations' World Food Program moved quickly into central Java and chose Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia as one of eight partner organizations to deliver ninety-five tons of food aid. The Australian government immediately protested Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia's contract,[48] but World Food Program spokesman Barry Came said, "We don't pick groups to distribute aid based on their religious or political beliefs. We choose based on the ability to deliver, and so far they've performed up to standard. We have no complaints."[49] He backed down, however, under international pressure.[50] Both Ba'asyir and Abdurrahman had been proscribed under U.N. Security Council 1267 Committee lists as specially designated terrorist financiers, and Ba'asyir, just released from prison, was reportedly planning to deliver the World Food Program aid personally.[51]

The episode highlights a major problem facing the West when combating Islamism: The United Nations and international agencies either refuse to perform due diligence or use moral equivalency to justify support for Islamist organizations. Not only do such organizations receive Saudi support as they pursue sectarian radicalization, but too often they also indirectly receive subsidies from Western taxpayers who fund international organizations.

Conclusion

The Hezbollah model is not new to terrorist organizations, but it is new to Jemaah Islamiyah. Jemaah Islamiyah has taken advantage of an opening: Political will in Indonesia to dismantle terrorist infrastructure has waned as the nature of the group's militancy has become apparent. Released from prison, the group's leaders have been able to focus on political, religious, and charitable work. The civilian infrastructure they have developed will make the group?still committed to terrorism?more durable over the long term.

Policymakers in Indonesia need to understand precedent. The existence of charities and social service networks has not made Hamas or Hezbollah any less violent although they have contributed to de-legitimization of governments. The Indonesian government should do what the Lebanese, Israeli, and Palestinian Authority governments did not: They must uproot social networks. Few governments have put forward a comprehensive strategy for dealing with the phenomenon of the inverse triangle, and most disaggregate the terrorist and social welfare arms and fund raising.

There is intense international pressure on the Indonesian government to ban Jemaah Islamiyah, but no politician in the world's largest Muslim community has the political courage to do so. As Indonesia's top counterterrorism official, Ansyaad Mbai, stated, the reason there is no ban on Jemaah Islamiyah "is because the political situation is still very sensitive."[52] Complacency and political expediency rule the day in Jakarta. As long as Jemaah Islamiyah members do not blow things up or simply target Western interests, Jakarta will do little.

It is not just courts and counterterrorism officials who have grown frustrated. A handful of Muslim reformers and liberals have been at the center of a push to rewrite Law No. 8 (1995) on nongovernmental organizations to tighten both the process of NGO incorporation and increase oversight. The proposed law will make fundraising by unregistered (or de-registered) NGOs illegal. The proposed law would make Jemaah Islamiyah's fundraising illegal under Indonesian domestic law.[53]

This unwillingness to take on terrorist infrastructure is regrettable. First, like Hezbollah and Hamas, Jemaah Islamiyah has a long-term timetable. Second, by pursuing overt strategies, Jemaah Islamiyah is able to forge closer ties and common cause with Islamists who might otherwise eschew their violence. Many Indonesians no longer see Jemaah Islamiyah as a radical fringe organization even though the group's agenda has not changed. Third, there is little evidence that Jemaah Islamiyah will abandon terrorism. Tactics may shift, but strategy does not. Herein, Hamas again provides an example that should worry Indonesian authorities. Its assumption of political control in Gaza has not tempered its commitment to terrorism; indeed, Hamas has become even more aggressive since the January 2006 Palestinian elections.

Herein, Washington and other Western governments have an interest. Indonesia may be half a world away from the United States, but any Islamist gains in the archipelago nation will have profound repercussions on U.S. national security. Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in the world, and the United States should not cede the Indonesian population to the same Saudi-funded Islamists who radicalized their Arab brethren, recruited unencumbered for years in Afghan and Pakistani refugee camps, and profess an inflexible hatred of the United States, Israel, and the West. Washington should pressure Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines to uproot Jemaah Islamiyah's overt presence and cede them no political space where they can recruit and indoctrinate anew. Targeting their financial and social networks is essential to the long-term fight against terrorism.

Zachary Abuza is a professor of political science at Simmons College and author of Militant Islam in Southeast Asia: Crucible of Terror (Lynne Rienner, 2003), Muslims, Politics and Violence in Indonesia (Routledge, 2006), and Conspiracy of Silence: Islam and Insurgency in Thailand (U.S. Institute of Peace, forthcoming 2009).